Contents

THEORY OF SAND CONTROL

I. INTRODUCTION
Methods of controlling sand production in oil, gas, and water wells are constantly changing. Causes for
sand production are explored along with guidelines for analyzing well conditions so that the best method
of sand control can be chosen for each well.

II. REASONS FOR SAND PRODUCTION

The sand production mechanism is complex and influenced by each completion operation from first bit
penetration of the producing zone to start of production in a given well. However, the reasons for sand
1
production can be any one or a combination of the following:
A. Totally Unconsolidated Formations
Some formations are thought to be totally unconsolidated, or in a fluid state. Any attempt to
produce formation fluid can result in production of large amounts of sand with fluid.
B. High Production Rates
Some wells will produce sand if the fluid production rate is high. These wells will produce sand
free if production is restricted. For many years restricting production was a primary means of sand
control. Generally, as the total fluid production is increased in an attempt to maintain maximum oil
production, the increased gross production rate causes excessive stresses on weakly
consolidated formations and may exceed the ability of the cementitious material to bond sand
grains together.
C. Onset of Water Production
In some formations, the cementatious material is clay minerals and silt, which may be seriously
affected by water. When water production starts, the bond is weakened or destroyed and
formation sand may be produced.
D. Subsidence Due to Reservoir Depletion
In some cases reservoir pressure is believed to aid in the support of overburden. Reduction of
reservoir pressure may cause the overburden to subside and crush a poorly consolidated
formation and result in sand production and serious casing damage.
E. Improper Well Completion Practices
Misuse of acid for stimulation may remove the small amount of calcareous bonding material in
certain weakly consolidated formations and may result in sand production.
In some cases swabbing a well too hard or bringing the well to desired production capacity too
quickly can cause excessive stress on weakly consolidated formations.
Instantly opening some wells to maximum production can cause water to be drawn into the
2
wellbore and adjacent matrix. As mentioned under item C above, water production often
initiates the production of sand by clay swelling and movement of fines. Well completion practices
such as these can cause premature sand production in wells that might have produced sand free
for years.

All footnotes are referenced on the last page of this section.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 1

III. ADVANTAGES OF EARLY SAND CONTROL

In the vast majority of cases, permeability damage and lost production can be minimized. Better and less
3
expensive sand control is attained when control measures are implemented early in the life of the well.
The following items should be carefully considered when deciding to perform sand control measures:
A. Formation Damage
Investigators have found that a large decrease in permeability may occur when formation sand is
3
deliberately disturbed. This can happen with little change in formation porosity. Such reductions
in formation permeability become increasingly severe as sand is allowed to produce. In most
instances, particularly when resin consolidation methods are to be employed, this formation
damage makes successful sand control more difficult. Limited consolidation of the disturbed zone
may occur and sand production from this zone may follow when the well is returned to production.
Sand which is produced during early life of a well may be the supporting matrix for shale streaks.
Unsupported shale could fall across some of the perforations after removal of sand support.
Satisfactory placement of remedial sand control materials may then be prevented.
B. Sand Disposal
Another reason for applying sand control is to avoid or minimize costly handling and disposal of
sand. This is particularly true where produced solids must be removed from fluid handling facilities
on platforms and in pipelines to shore. Disposal can be especially costly when sand must be
essentially oil-free to meet pollution regulations.
C. Equipment Damage
In wells subject to sand production, abrasion and erosion damage to goods is frequently reported.
Sand entrained fluids are capable of cutting completely through tubing strings and weakening
casing. Surface equipment can also receive severe damage from sand entrained in fluids due to
impingement. This can present the danger of blowout or fire.
D. Cost
Determining the proper time to install sand control measures is a risk-weighted decision. Whether
or not to install sand control is governed by cost balanced against risks involved if no measures
are taken. Some risks normally associated with not taking sand control measures early in the life
4
of the well are:
1. Sand production will commence with its associated disadvantages if not controlled initially.
2. Cost of remedial measures may far exceed that of primary sand control.
3. Remedial sand control may fail, whereas primary control would be much surer.
Initial cost may be fairly accurately estimated but the cost of remedial work is less predictable,
particularly in areas where there is little experience.

IV. METHODS OF SAND CONTROL

There are many approaches to controlling the movement of formation particles into a wellbore. All
methods conceived thus far can be categorized into three broad groups. These groups are briefly
1
described below:
A. Mechanical
Mechanical methods are those methods of controlling sand by use of mechanical bridging or
screening installations such as gravel or sand pack, and/or liners or wire wrapped screens.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 2

B. Chemical
Chemical methods of sand control employ chemicals and resins which are injected into the poorly
consolidated formations to provide insitu grain-to-grain cementation.
C. Combination
Combination methods are designed to accomplish both mechanical packing and chemical
consolidation of the pack simultaneously. These methods are often referred to as consolidated
packs. A slurry consisting of carrier fluid, resin, coupling agent, and sand is normally used to
establish the pack. A slurry is blended at the surface where plastic coats the pack sand. Plastic
coated sand is then pumped through the perforations, where the plastic cures on the pack sand
after grain-to-grain contact is achieved.

V. MECHANICAL METHODS
By far, the predominant method of mechanical sand control is gravel or sand packing. Gravel
packing actually refers to the placement of a bed of closely graded sand to serve as a restraining
mechanism to keep formation sand from entering the wellbore and perforation tunnels. It is
usually placed in conjunction with a screen. In the past, some operators arbitrarily used very large
grain gravel without regard to the size of the formation sand. This is now considered poor
procedure.
Several methods have been used over the years to achieve what is now referred to in general as
a gravel pack. The more common ones are described below with emphasis on those having
proved most reliable and non-damaging.
A. Screens Alone
This procedure has many shortcomings. It is still being employed by some operators in hopes of
cutting economic corners while attaining some degree of sand control.
A screen is placed across the producing interval and the wall is allowed to produce and create its
own gravel-pack with formation sand. This method promotes formation disturbances and possible
permeability damage. The pack may fail to establish, and screen plugging and severe production
loss may occur.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 3

B. Gravity Pack (Fig. 1-1)

5
One of the most primitive of the gravel packing techniques is referred to as a gravity pack.
This technique is performed with water in the hole. A screening device is run into the hole on
tubing with a backoff joint. Sand is slowly poured down the annulus as fluid is running into the
hole. Care must be taken to avoid bridging of sand around the tubing collars.
This type of installation is usually performed without benefit of service company assistance. It
5
is highly unlikely that any sand is forced through the perforations with this approach.
Consequently, flow into the wellbore may be restricted by formation fines invading the pack.
C

Reverse Circulation Pack (Fig. 1-2)

The reverse circulation pack is the name given to a procedure utilizing reverse circulation of
water-sand or gelled water-sand slurry. If it is desired to place some sand through the
perforations, returns at the surface may be shut off and pumping continued until a pressure
increase indicates that sand has covered the tell-tale screen. If no positive pressure is exerted,
only sand packing inside the wellbore is likely to be achieved.
A water-sand or water gel sand slurry is reverse-circulated with returns to the surface being taken
through the screening device placed across the producing interval. Normally, if water is the carrier
fluid, a sand loading of 1/2 to 1 1/2 lbs/gallon is used. If a gelled carrier fluid is used, higher sand
loading, up to 15 lbs/gallon, may be employed. Two or three joints of unslotted tubing are
generally run above the screen to provide a space for sand to fill the annulus above the screen.
This normally will prevent movement of fluids and sand up the annulus, and provide a reserve of
pack sand if the pack settles.

D. Wash Down Pack (Fig. 1-3)

The wash down method consists of depositing gravel to a predetermined height above
perforations, then running the screen and liner assembly with a wash pipe and a circulating type
3
shoe. The screen is washed down through the gravel. When the shoe is on bottom, gravel is
allowed to fall back around the screen and liner.
This approach has minimum provision for compacting the gravel in the screen-casing annulus,
and there is no provision during the final step for squeezing gravel through the perforations.
However, the well may be pressure-packed prior to washing down the screen. There may be
some segregation of the gravel sizes during the wash down.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 4

E. Pressure Packing
Since the perforation tunnels are the only communication to the wellbore from the formation, it is
of critical importance that they remain unclogged by formation sand and fines (Fig 1-4). If gravel
packing is to be used to control sand production, the pack sand should fill the perforation tunnels.
The sand should also fill void spaces behind the casing. It is sometimes possible to re-stress the
10.
formation. This is very seldom achieved except through pressure gravel packing
1. Circulating Pressure Pack (Fig. 1-5)
The installation of a Circulating Pressure Pack requires a packer and crossover tool, as well as
a screen with an internal wash pipe. This technique permits injection of slurry down the tubing
which may prevent the scouring of mud, rust , pipe dope, and scale from the tubing-casing
5,7
annulus. These materials could damage the permeability of the pack.
The slurry crosses over into the annulus below the packer. The carrier fluid deposits the sand
and enters the screen and wash pipe. The fluid is then conveyed to the annulus above the
packer by means of the crossover and returned to the surface.
In order to place sand through the perforations, surface returns may be stopped and slurry
squeezed against the formations. This should be done before the perforations are covered
with slurry.
2. Bullhead Pressure Pack (Fig. 1-6)
This procedure requires the use of a packer and a releasing crossover tool (Halliburton). No
tell-tale screen or wash pipe is required since no returns are taken during the procedure. The
water-gel sand slurry is pumped down the tubing behind a gel prepad. The slurry is directed
from the tubing into the casing-screen annulus through the releasing crossover tool below the
packer. Pumping pressure increases as more perforations are covered with pack sand. After
final sand out, the packer is released from the screen and blank pipe at the crossover tool.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 5

F. Open-Hole Gravel Packing

Open-hole gravel packing may be performed with techniques and equipment already described.
The crossover method (Fig. 1-7) has had wide application in open-hole intervals.

There are extremely important considerations upon which rest the ultimate success or failure of
the gravel packs.
CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Practice of Underreaming
In California and some other areas, underreaming is employed in open-hole completions prior
to gravel-packing (Fig. 1-8). This serves to improve production and allow placement of a
thicker sheath of gravel between the wellbore and screen. The following example illustrates the
advantage of underreaming.
The % reduction P required to inject 1 cp fluid into a 2.8 darcy formation for an unfilled 6
in. diameter (.25 ft radius) wellbore compared to injecting through the same interval after
underreaming to 20 in. diameter (.83 ft radius) and gravel packing with 120 darcy sand
can be calculated.
r2 (ft)
Q (BPD) x In r1 (ft)
P =

7.08 x k (darcies) h(ft)

Where: Q = Rate, 3428 BPD

V = viscosity of fluid, 1 cp
r2 = external radius, ft See case 1 or 2
r1 = internal radius, ft See case 1 or 2
k = permeability, formation 2.8d, pack sand 120d
h = zone height, 10 ft

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 6

Case 1 (6 in. diameter wellbore)

r2
660 ft
= 2640
r1
.25 ft
P total = 136.2 psi

Case 2 (underreamed & gravel packed)

(a)
r2
.83 ft
= 3.33
r1
.25 ft
P
(b)

partial

= .49 psi

r2

660 ft

r1

.83 ft

= 795.48

(c)

P
P

partial
total

= 115.48 psi
= 116 psi

Therefore, P reduction in Case 2 equals 14.8%. A producing well presents a comparable

situation.
2. Hole Deviation

In wells where the borehole angle is not more than 45 from the vertical, conventional gravel
packing may be relatively efficient, and progress from the bottom toward the top. At borehole

angles greater than 45 ,conventional packing becomes less efficient, with packing often
8
occurring from top toward the bottom.
During conventional gravel placement in high-angle holes, a sand dune begins to form near the
liner top and enlarges until restriction increases fluid velocity so that gravel is carried over and
8
deposited at the bottom of the dune. The dune grows and extends downward toward the
bottom of the well. However, fluid escaping from the gravel through the screen eventually
lowers the velocity enough so that the channel bridges off completely. Gravel then can only be
deposited above the bridge, resulting in partial filling. The above condition exists with
8
unthickened carrying fluid.
Two techniques have been suggested to overcome duning and premature sandout and were
tested in the Halliburton gravel pack model. The first was flexible rubber baffles attached to a
9
the wash pipe to restrict the clearance between the screen and wash pipe.
Increased wash pipe diameter was also tested. The latter was found to be particularly effective
8
in increasing the efficiency of a gravel pack. Restricting the clearance between the slotted
liner and the wash pipe materially increases the amount of pack sand that can be placed in the

casing-liner annulus in highly deviated boreholes (>45 ) when a thin carrying fluid is used.
It should be noted, however, that high fluid velocities are required to maintain the pack sand in
suspension in thin fluids. These rates in deviated open hole applications may not be attainable
when fluid losses to the formations are taken into account. The role of high fluid velocity in
formation-pack sand intermixing should be considered, as greatly reduced pack permeability
can result. This condition is especially evident in an open hole situation. As the dune builds up
in a highly deviated hole, a high velocity flow channel develops above the dune in the borehole8
liner annulus. The scouring effect of this high slurry velocity on the exposed formation could
easily entrain sufficient formation sand in the pad to seriously reduce its permeability. By
contrast, the low pump rates made possible by the use of a thickened carrying fluid containing
high sand concentrations would not only reduce the scouring action of the slurry but would also
reduce the fluid loss from the slurry to the formation and help to maintain a more uniform slurry
8, 10
velocity throughout the annulus interval being packed.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 7

G. Modern-Day Practices & Considerations

In recent years some methods and procedures have been found to cause unexpectedly large
amounts of permeability damage. These methods and procedures earlier had appeared to be
sound and were widely used.
1. Intermixing of Pack and Formation Sand
Investigators have determined that low viscosity fluid (e.g. water) carrying sand at high pump
rates can cause intermixing of the pack sand and the finer formation sand because of jetting
effect. As shown in Fig. 1-9, at pump rates of 5 GPM through a .5 in. perforation with a water1, 11
sand slurry severe intermixing occurs.
PUMP
vs.
RATES
AT -- - -- - -- - -- 3 GPM
AT
5 GPM

INTRUSION
PATTERNS
AT -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - 7.5 GPM
AT ...............................9 GPM

Jetting Pattern of Waters Containing 0.5 lb

20/40 U. S. Mesh Sand Per Gallon Into
Simulated Formation Sand (70/170 U.S. Mesh)
Test Call Volume: 1.5 ft
Cell Size: 18 in. Long x 13.5 in. Diameter
Perforation Size: 0.5 in. Diameter
Distance of formation sand from perforation: 7-9 in.
Result: Intermixing began occurring at a rate
of 5 GPM (after decker)

In certain regions within the area where intermixing occurs, severe permeability damage can
take place. Fig. 1-10 shows that the most damage occurs at a ratio of approximately 70% by
volume pack gravel and 30% by volume formation sand. The greater the ratios between the
permeability of the pack sand to the permeability of the formation, the greater the potential for
12, 1
damage.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 8

2. Carrier Fluid, Discussion

Filtered brine carrying 1/2 to 1 1/2 pounds of sand per gallon may be pumped, or a viscous water
fluid carrying 10 to 15 pounds of sand per gallon may be used. The slurry is pumped at or below a
predetermined surface pressure until a sandout occurs (a pressure buildup indicating maximum
sand volume placement). It is difficult to achieve adequate suspension of sand in water at low
rates.
Selection of the proper carrier fluid to achieve high pack efficiency at low pump rates is of high
12,13
importance in gravel packing to minimize this potential source of damage.
Considering the advantages of water (high fluid loss) and of the viscous carriers (high transport
efficiency), the ideal gravel pack fluid can be defined as one which combines the properties of the
two and causes minimum intermixing. Such a carrier would provide the capability of placing larger
1
volumes of pack sand outside the perforations at higher pack density.
The ideal carrier fluid should also have the ability to carry the sand through the well hardware and

negotiate the 90 angle turn from the casing into the perforation tunnels. Sand placement with
such a fluid could give longer life to the pack, allow less movement of the pack during production,
and minimize migration of formation fines into the pack.
Water-sand slurries must be pumped at a high enough velocity to prevent sand settling during
placement. As presented under Intermixing of Pack and Formation Sand, very damaging
intermixing can occur at high pack placement rates. Viscous carrier fluids were introduced in
order to improve sand carrying efficiency. By using a viscous carrier fluid, high concentrations of
sand (up to 15 pounds per gallon) can be safely transported at very low rates (0.5 barrels per
minute). At the low rates, there is very little disturbance and/or intermixing with the formation sand.
1,8
This minimizes permeability loss in the pack.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 9

a. Viscous Water Base Fluids

Low residue hydroxyethyl cellulose (HEC) is the viscosifying agent in many thickened water
13
systems. HEC systems have a number of advantages including:
(1) Shear thinning which minimizes pressure drop during placement.
(2) Internal breakers which decompose the cellulose and reduce viscosity after placement for
improved clean up.
(3) Minimal pollution problems.
Viscous systems require less carrier fluid due to high gravel concentration. This also may cut
rig time, minimize formation damage, and reduce equipment erosion during placement.
b. Viscous Oils
Prior to the time when clean-breaking, high efficiency water gelling agents were available,
investigators were aware of the advantages of viscous gravel packing fluids that were capable
of carrying high sand concentrations, i.e., 10 to 15 pounds per gallon. The attention of some
14
Certain crude oils and
investigators and operators turned to hydrocarbon carrying fluids.
refined oil having viscosities ranging from 50 to 100 cp, either naturally occurring or artificially
gelled, were used to prepare sand laden slurries for gravel pack placements. An example of
the application of a viscous oil carrying fluid is Sand-Oil-Squeeze technique used in Venezuela.
The pack sand to be pumped in a natural viscous refined oil is pretreated chemically to create
a preferentially water wet condition on the sand grains, even though the sand is pumped in oil.
15
Many successful gravel packs have been and are being performed via this technique.
Although viscous oils provide some advantages over water and thin oils, i.e., kerosene and
diesel fuel, such as: less fluid required, less fluid loss to formation, and less intermixing of pack
sand with formation sands, they are not without problems. Operators electing to gravel pack
with viscous oils should be cautious to select oils having little or no paraffin or asphaltene
content. The oil to be used should be pre-tested to determine if an emulsion problem will be
present when the oil contacts the formation fluids. A chemical additive may be required should
a potential emulsion problem be indicated. The amount of gel break residue deposited by
certain viscous oils created by soap gelling agents should be carefully considered before
selecting such a system for gravel packing. Considerable irreparable formation damage can
occur due to such gel break residue becoming lodged in formation matrix.
3. Gravel Crushing by Pumps, Etc.
Full scale tests using a Halliburton HT-400 pump to circulate gelled water slurry containing 15
pounds of sand per gallon showed minimal crushing due to pump action.
16

A source of sand crushing has been divulged through research work. This work determined that
pumping sand-laden water mixtures at greater than 5 barrels per minute through a 1 in. crossover
port causes fracturing of some of the sand grains. The blasting effect of sand hitting the casing
walls produces enough fines in these model tests to completely plug liner slots. When the
experiment was repeated with HEC gelled water carrying 15 pounds of sand per gallon, packing
was achieved with virtually no plugging of slots. This was because less velocity was required to
move the sand efficiently through the crossover tool. The cushioning effect of the gel is thought to
reduce grain-to-grain abrasion, which can also generate fines.
Glass beads have proven ineffective due to high solubility in HF acid. Sintered bauxite, although
expensive, is excellent from the standpoint of strength, permeability and particle sizing. It has a
density of 3.65 compared to 2.65 for sand.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 10

a. Halliburton Standards for Sand

To achieve a successful gravel pack, special care should be taken in the selection of the pack
sand.
Halliburton endorses the American Petroleum Institute Standards Subcommittee recommendations
to the industry regarding size graduation, shape (sphericity), strength and allowable percentage of
17
foreign material in sand to be used for gravel packing.
(1) Sand size should be quality controlled so that a proper formation-to-pack gravel size ratio is
maintained and absolute permeability is not lowered.
A minimum of 96% of any useable sand sample should fall between the designating sieve
sizes, i.e., 8/16, 12/20, 20/40, etc. For example, not over 2% should be smaller than the last
mesh size of 20/40 mesh sand. In other words, not more than 2% should be smaller than the 40
mesh sieve.
If the sand grains, upon microscopic examination, are found to consist primarily of clusters of
two or more sand grains, the sand should not be considered suitable as a gravel pack sand.
(2) Grain roundness is also important since angular sand has more tendency to form premature
bridges than rounded sands. Angular sand is also more subject to chipping and fragmenting
during placement, which reduces the permeability of the pack and can clog slots and screens.
Grain roundness is a measure of the relative sharpness of grain corners, or of grain curvature.
Evaluation of sand grain roundness should be made on the same sample as that used for
sphericity determinations. Roundness of each grain should be determined, recorded, and an
average roundness obtained for the sample. Thin section analysis is very valuable in
determining roundness or angularity of grains.
(3) Particle sphericity is a measure of how close a sand particle or grain approaches the shape of a
sphere. The most widely used method of determining sphericity is with a visual comparator.
7
Krumbein and Sloss (1955) developed a chart for use in visual estimation of sphericity and
roundness (refer to Figure 1-11). A sand sample should be evaluated for sphericity by randomly
selecting 20 or more grains for examination. These grains should be viewed through a 10- to
20- power microscope or examination of photomicrograph of comparable enlargement.
Sphericity of each grain should be determined, recorded, and an average sphericity obtained for
the sample.
(4) The weight percentage of a gravel pack sand which is soluble in a solution of 12% HCL-3% HF
acids is an indication of the amount of undesirable contaminates within the sand or coated on
the sand. This category of contaminates includes: calcareous minerals, feldspars, iron oxides,
and clays. Exposure of sands to this HCL-HF solution, under controlled conditions, furnishes
part of the reliable data with which gravel pack sands can be compared or quality controlled.
Sands containing more than 1% of acid soluble contaminates is not recommended for gravel
packing since they could be a source of fines and grain fracturing, thus reducing the life of a
pack.

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 11

(5) The weight percentage of clay-sized particles, i.e. passing 325 mesh screen, in a sand is very
important in determining its applicability to gravel packing. Since a high permeability matrix is
imperative, sands containing more than 0.5% fines, i.e. clay-sized particles, is not
recommended as a gravel pack material.
b. Sizing of Pack Materials
To correctly determine the size pack sand to use in a specific zone to be gravel packed, a
laboratory sieve analysis of a representative sample of the formation in question must be
performed and recorded in a manner shown in Figure 1-12.

U.S
SIEVE
SIEVE OPENING
NO.
INCH

WEIGHT
WEIGHT
RETAINE
D

10
.0787
20
.0331
30
.0232
40
.0165
.20
60
.0098
8.19
80
.0070
23.20
100
.0059
27.33
120
.0049
13.65
140
.0041
5.94
170
.0035
4.78
200
.0029
3.32
325
.0017
2.10
PASS 325
1.24
TOTAL
90.05
LABORATORY REFERENCE:

PERCENT

.22
9.10
25.90
30.30
15.20
6.60
5.32
3.68
2.33
1.36
100.00

CUMULATIVE
PERCENT

.22
9.32
35.22
65.52
80.72
87.32
92.63
96.31
98.64
100.00

X-RAY DIFFERACTION
QUARTZ
FELDSPARS
CALCITE
DOLOMITE
KAOLINITE
ILLITE
MONTMORILLONITE
MIXED LAYER CLAY
BARITE
OTHER
ANHYDRITE

ANALYSIS OF 325
MESH FACTOR
MAJOR
SMALL
TRACE
SMALL
TRACE
SMALL

SMALL

SAMPLE NO.

Figure 1-12
TYPICAL SIEVE ANALYSIS SHEET

Copyright 1996 Halliburton Company

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 12

As shown in Figure 1-13, the sieve data is plotted on semi-log paper from which the D50 point (median
sand size) can be observed along the horizontal axis of the plot.
Correct sizing of pack materials is extremely important and has changed some in recent years. The
earlier criterion was bridging. Latest designs are for absolute stoppage of formation sands. Smaller
gravel sizes have been successfully and widely applied on the U.S. Gulf Coast, and are being used
experimentally elsewhere.
1,6

It showed
Sauciers work was instrumental in setting the industrys trend toward smaller gravel sizes.
that at median pack-to-formation grain size ratio of about 14, formation sand could flow through the pack
relatively unrestrained, as indicated by the dashed portion of Figure 1-14.
Reduced pack permeability due to formation sand invasion occurs in the ratio range of 6-14.
Consequently, Saucier recommends ratios of 5-6, which appear to provide absolute stoppage of
formation sand movements into or through the gravel.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 13

Therefore the following rule should be used in selecting a gravel for packing to prevent formation
production:
THE D50 SIZE OF THE PACK GRAVEL SHOULD FALL WITHIN A RANGE OF 5 TO 6 TIMES
THE D50 SIZE OF THE FORMATION SAND AS DETERMINED BY A SIEVE ANALYSIS.
Screening Devices
Halliburton offers a complete line of downhole sand screens or liners. These devices provide a
means of retaining the gravel pack in place while providing high flow capacity for fluids produced
from the formation.
a. Wire Wrapped Screens
Wire wrapped screens are manufactured by wrapping wire around a specially constructed
mandrel. The mandrel is made of standard oil field tubular goods which have been drilled or
slotted. In order to provide maximum flow area, spacing or stand-off should be provided
between the mandrel and the wire wrap. This may take the form of grooves cut into the pipe,
or ribs may be affixed to the pipe. The wire is usually of stainless steel or other alloy which will
resist corrosion. It may be square or it may have a keystone (or triangular) cross-section. (see
Figs. 1-15 and, 1-16).

b. Spacing
The keystone-shaped wire should be wrapped with the smaller dimension toward the mandrel
which results in a lesser tendency to clog since there is a minimum contact area between the
wire and particle.
The wire spacing is held to very close tolerances. The screens is either welded or soldered at
every contact point. For water wells and shallow oil wells, screens are available without a
mandrel. The wire wrap is held in place by ribs alone.
THE SPACING BETWEEN THE WIRES SHOULD BE 0.5 TO 1.0 TIMES THE DIAMETER OF
THE SMALLEST PACK SAND GRAIN.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 14

c. Slotted Liners
Slotted liners have been manufactured in a number of ways. The simplest are made of oil field
tubular goods which have been slotted with a precision saw or mill. Some have slots cut
circumferentially, although this practice weakens the tubing in tension.

Mill-Slotted Pipe Screens afford strength and good service economically. They are
particularly suitable in coarse gravel formations or in water wells. However, the
user should not expect the inlet area or corrosion resistance afforded by wire
wrapped ribbed pipe base screens.

Gauge openings are determined by the size of the vertical slots, square cut in the
pipe. Total inlet area is governed by the size and number of slots in a given
diameter and length of pipe.
Slots are precision cut - with square sides in a slight spiral around the pipe,
in staggered rows: then deburred inside and out. Undercut slits and louver type
slots (as used in the shutter screen) have feathered edges which are subject to far
more rapid washout and corrosion than square slots. Slots are also superior to
torch cut slots, which are seldom accurate and always leave slag inside the pipe.
Slot openings are available from .020 in. to .250 in. to widths and in pipe sizes from
1 in. to 16 in. OD.
While inlet areas are calculated on a standard number of slots per foot, size and
number of slots varies with pipe and screen specifications. Sizes not listed are
available on request.

THE SLOTS SHOULD BE MACHINED OR SAWED TO A WIDTH EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN THE
DIAMETER OF THE SMALLEST PACK SAND GRAIN.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 15

VI. Chemical Methods

Sand control by chemical consolidation involves the process of injecting chemicals into the naturally
unconsolidated formation to provide grain-to-grain cementation. Techniques for accomplishing this
successfully are perhaps the most sophisticated undertaken in completion work.

The objective of formation sand consolidation is to cement sand grains together at the contact points
and create a matrix. Excess plastic material should be displaced from pore spaces by overflush fluid.
A. Internally Activated Systems
The resin solution is composed of resin, diluent, coupling agent and either a curing agent or
catalyst and accelerator.
In dirty sands, high yield resin solutions are required to accommodate the large surface area of
the silt and clay particles. Some systems have an inadequate yield and are recommended for use
in clean sands only.
Some processes employ phase separation which includes the use of a relatively dilute solution of
resin in hydrocarbon solvent. Combined with an activator (curing agent or catalyst), the liquid resin
phase separates from the solvent after a period of time and solidifies. After separation, but still in
the liquid state, the resin is drawn by surface tension to the grain-to-grain contact points. Several
18
other systems combine phase separation with an overflush.
B. Externally Activated Systems
Overflush processes, as these systems are sometimes called, utilize a high yield resin solution.
Permeability is established by pumping an overflush fluid into the formation, displacing all but a
residual resin saturation at the grain-to-grain contact points. Overflush is designed to control
19
thickness of the plastic film which controls compressive strength and permeability.

Figure 1-20
A typical sequential injection of chemicals
to produce an artificially permeable matrix.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 16

Preflushes are used for various purposed in these consolidation systems. Formation brine
19
concentration is reduced by injection of hydrocarbons containing surfactants. Connate water can
be removed with some alcohol, surfactants or mutual solvents. Low compressive strengths (2040% of that possible) was demonstrated in the laboratory when insufficient water was removed.
Overflushes are either hydrocarbon or may be aqueous. They normally contain catalyst or
accelerator. Some are viscous to improve sweep efficiency. In some cases a two-step overflush is
used -- one flush to restore permeability and the second to introduce a cure activator or an
19
accelerator.
C. Remarks Concerning the Processes
When the activator is in the resin solution, overflush may still be needed to establish or insure
permeability, but it is not needed to insure that the plastic will eventually cure. An accelerator in
the overflush may speed curing and minimize waiting time.
When activator is in the overflush, placement time is not a factor and cure time (waiting time) may
be minimized. The overflush must be distributed throughout the plasticized zone for the desired
permeability and/or cure to result.
Continual introduction of new and improved sand consolidation techniques is indicative of the
industrys need for this type of sand control approach. Investigation of alternative techniques is
being undertaken due to environmental considerations. Logistic and storage problems, fire
hazards and the increased cost of treating oils are some to the major problems with oil-placed
systems.
Development of water placement systems which overcome some of the limitations posed by oil
systems have been accomplished. Field use of the systems indicates results are comparable to
those achieved with oil-placed resin consolidation techniques. Certain resin systems are similar to
those successfully used in past sand consolidation work. The placement techniques are identical
20
except for the changes in the fluids used from diesel oil to salt water.
The desirable characteristics for a consolidation process include (1) minimum preparation time at
well-site, (2) low injection pressure, (3) short cure time before restoring well to production, (4) high
compressive strength of resulting matrix, (5) high retained permeability, and (6) good resistance to
deterioration from well fluids and commonly used treating fluids.
The amount of resin to use for a given application is sometimes determined arbitrarily. Some
operators attempt to create a consolidated cylinder six ft in diameter. This is strictly theoretical
since formation inconsistencies will interfere with uniform penetration of the resin. The object of
this cylindrical matrix is to provide some casing support as well as to minimize particle migration.
The greater the diameter of the theoretical cylinder, the lower the velocity of flow at the extremity.
There is less tendency to transport particles at lower velocities.
Sand consolidation chemicals have been available for over 30 years. Several types of
consolidating material have been tried, including crude oil, coking, and nickel plating. But
presently available systems include: phenolic, phenol-formaldehyde, epoxy, furan and
phenol-furfuryl resins.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 17

D. Permeability Retentions
It is important to investigate the retained permeability as a percent of original permeability after
consolidation of a sample of the formation with a particular resin. Some resin systems leave less
of the original permeability than others. In general, the use of furan resins results in better
19,20
permeability.
In the above tests a blended sand consisting of 88 pbw 70/170 mesh, 10 pbw 200 mesh, and 2%
<325 mesh bentonite should be used to prepare the consolidations.
E. Strength Degradation
Early plastic consolidation systems suffered significant strength loss with long term exposure to
brine, apparently due to water encroachment between cured resin and the sand grain surface. A
consolidated sand exposed for one week lost 50% of compressive strength, and thereafter, more
gradual strength reductions occurred.
21

Small quantities of coupling agent are used in all Halliburton systems. As a result of the
improved adhesion to sand, compressive strengths of the consolidation systems are not
appreciably affected by brine.
F. Clay Containing Formations
Consolidation treatments in formations containing excessive amounts of clay require special
treatment. Clays may require large amounts of resin or may extract the curing agent from the
resin. It is common practice to precede resin treatments with acid to shrink clays.
G. Isolation Of Intervals
If multiple intervals are to be treated with consolidating fluids, they should be isolated with
packers and/or bridge plugs if spacing permits. If more than one interval is treated without
isolation, small differences in injection pressures may interfere with uniform injection of fluids.
If a single zone is to be treated, a packer should be used to control fluids. The alternative is to fill
the annulus with a compatible fluid to avoid contamination of the treating fluids.
H. Prepacking
If it becomes necessary to use a consolidation technique on an older well that has produced an
appreciable quantity of sand, the well should by packed with clean sand prior to consolidation. It is
difficult, if not impossible, to achieve uniform distribution of the resin into the formation when
pumping through a cavity or loose zone. It also is desirable to restress the formation to some
22
degree.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 18

LEFT SIDE SHOWS PRE-PACKED PERFORATIONS

AND RESTRESSED FORMATION SAND. THE PACK
SAND AND SOME FORMATION SAND ARE
CONSOLIDATED WITH RESIN. THE RIGHT SIDE
SHOWS LIKELY RESULTS IF NO PREPACKING IS
DONE.

VII. CHEMICAL-MECHANICAL SAND CONTROL

This method of sand control is one that can be used not only in conventionally completed perforated
casing, like the chemical methods, but may also be used in open hole completions. This is a method of
combined packing and consolidating.
Procedures for packing with resin-coated sand have been successfully applied and commercially
available for several years. Several processes or variations are available. Some lend themselves to
continuous blending while others require batch mixing.
Resin-coated sand combines the advantage of packing and consolidation. It provides a rigid matrix
permeability higher than that of the formation, causes no obstruction in the casing, and is particularly
adaptable to older wells that have produced sand. However, the age of the well is not the determining
factor. The space available in which resin-coated sand is to be placed during the treatment more often
determines if the process can be successfully used.
During this treatment, sand and resin are placed in a single operation. The pack sand becomes coated
with resin before reaching the formation. This treatment is similar to the application of gravel pack
23
except the pack sand is resin coated.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 19

This service is available with several resins and is usually applied as a pressure pack. One chemicalmechanical procedure used in perforated casing is to disperse resin and low concentrations of sand in a
thin carrier fluid in a mixing tank. The sand-to-carrier fluids ratio is normally 1/2 lb/gallon. The resin-tosand ratio is from 3 to 5 gallon per sack. During mixing, some of the resin automatically coats the pack
sand. The excess resin remains dispersed in the carrier fluid. As the mixture is pumped, the resincoated sand screens off against the formation. As the carrier fluid moves into the formation, tight grainto-grain contact is attained in the pack sand. The excess resin in the carrier fluid coats the formation
sand. When the well refuses to accept any more coated sand, the solids left in the wellbore may be
circulated out, so that the hole is clean of solids. The clean-out is followed by a spacer and catalyst
23
solution. This results in a consolidation of both the pack sand and the formation sand.
Variations of this application allow either an internal or an external catalyst to be used. Also, if desired,
the excess resin can be eliminated, resulting in a consolidation of only the pack sand.
Another common chemical-mechanical procedure in perforated casing involves the use of a thick carrier
fluid and high concentrations of sand. The sand concentration may be as high as 15 lb/gallon, while the
resin concentration is usually 1 gallon per sack. During mixing, all of the resin coats the pack sand. No
excess resin remains dispersed in the carrier fluid. The mixture is pumped into the well, but little or no
24
carrier fluid is lost to the formation. This system is internally catalyzed.
When the well refuses to accept any more coated sand, the well is shut in and the resin is allowed to
harden. The solids in the wellbore are then removed by drilling. This method results in a consolidation of
only the pack sand.

VIII. SELECTING A METHOD OF SAND CONTROL

A. Factors to Consider
As discussed previously, sand control methods may be classified as mechanical, chemical or
mechanical-chemical. These are discussed beginning on page 3. Some of the factors which need
3,4
to be considered when selecting the most desirable method of control are listed below:
Initial sand control cost
Expected reliability
Effect on productivity
Completion repair cost
Formation sand quality
Presence of multiple, thin productive sections
Exclusion of interbedded water or gas
Presence of desirable shale streaks
Level of reservoir pressure depletion
History of sand production
B. Cost Factors
Since consolidation chemicals presently in use are relatively expensive, consolidation is normally
more costly per foot than gravel packing. The total cost of consolidation is significantly influenced
by the length of interval treated. However, rig cost must be considered since most gravel packs
require a rig. Consolidation may sometimes be installed after the rig has been removed.
3,4

Conditions under which consolidation might be selected should include a combination of:
1. A short interval (12 feet or less)
2. Lack of previous sand production (new well). Uniform chemical distribution is difficult when
a cavity or unstressed formation exists.
3. Upper zones of multiple completions (no obstruction is left in the wellbore).
4. Clean sand with sufficient vertical permeability.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 20

If a well does not present these conditions, gravel packing or combination methods should be
strongly considered.
Under the above conditions, with the elimination of rig cost mentioned previously, chemical
consolidation may be the least expensive approach.
C. Advantages of the Processes

3,4,12,13

1. Gravel Packing
a. Can give higher productivity in many cases.
b Materials are simple, non-toxic.
2. Chemical Consolidation
a. Can restore production in some situations at minimum cost.
b. Can be applied to relatively short intervals.
c. Fine sands can be consolidated successfully with proper design considerations.
d. leaves wellbore unencumbered for future workover operations.
3. Chemical-Mechanical Packing and Consolidating
a. Often results in high productivity after treatment.
b. Can be relatively inexpensive in some simple situations.
c. Suitable for zones of older wells which may have produced some sand and would need
prepacking before effective consolidation could be done.

IX. WELL CONDITIONS RELATED TO SAND CONTROL

The most frequent cause of failure of sand control processes is improper planning and well preparation
prior to application of the sand control method selected. Some of the most important points of well
preparation follow:
A. Drilling
Drilling fluids and drilling operations should be monitored to reduce the chance of permeability
damage. If this damage occurs and is not removed, non-uniform placement of consolidation
chemicals or pack gravel may result. Drilling fluid should not disperse or swell water sensitive
clays contained in formations adjacent to the wellbore. Hydrated, swollen clays reduce effective
2,5
permeability. Corrective measures are difficult to perform and expensive.
Washouts through the productive zone can be caused by poor drilling practice. These in turn may
result in perforations which fail to penetrate the productive formation adequately, since an
excessively thick cement sheath may be in the washout.
Larger hole and casing sizes reduce shear forces of fluid movement into the wellbore, therefore
lessening the burden on weak formations that produce sand.
B. Cementing
Proper cementing of a well is imperative to achieve best results from any type of sand control
treatment. Figure 1-22 depicts poor mud removal due to an off-center casing string that was not
moved during cementing. The uncemented channel behind the casing may extend many feet
vertically behind the casing. If such a channel is later exposed when perforating, poor resin or
gravel packing will likely occur. This often leads to failure.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 21

The off-center casing problem increases greatly when hole deviation increases. The following
measures should be taken while drilling and cementing, especially in high angle holes, to minimize
1,3,5
channels and off-center pipe.
1.
2.
3.
4.

The hole should be as near to gauge as possible.

The casing string should be adequately centralized.
The cement slurry should be pumped in turbulent flow.
Well designed and abundant spacer should be used between the mud and cement.

C. Perforating
Since the early days of the oil industry and cable tool drilling, well completions have undergone a
process of evolution. The techniques used are chosen either on the basis of economics,
controlled production rate, or both.

1. Perforated Well Productivity

Maximum unstimulated well productivity would be obtained from an open hole completion with
maximum wellbore diameter and no formation damage. Since casing is cemented for orderly
reservoir control, considerable research has been directed toward determining the efficiency of
1, 3 &4
In these
completions. Figure 1-23 is a composite showing the results of three investigators.
studies, penetration and number of holes per foot were considered with the results shown as a

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 22

ratio of perforated to open hole productivity. As an average, four 1/2 in. holes per ft with 8 in.
25
Various well completion
penetration gives the equivalent of an open hole completion.
techniques may dictate reduction or increase in perforation density.
2. Potential damage
The conventional jet perforator is essentially a piercing/pulverizing device that creates holes
through casing and cement, and into the formation.
A minor amount of the perforation hole volume is obtained by compaction of material around the
hole. Cement and copper, lead and carbon from the jet charge penetrate into the target rock and
mix with crushed formation material.
Even with clean fluids, experimental data on perforation injectivity immediately after shooting with
overbalance showed that with either bullets or jets, injectivity was seriously restricted. Productivity
may also be low.
There are various measures which may be used separately or in combination to alleviate the
damage to the formation:
a. Place a filtered no-solids fluid across the interval before perforating.
b. Perforate with underbalance or differential pressure toward the wellbore.
c. Allow formation to produce after perforating with underbalance.
d. Clean perforations and formation face by backsurging or perforation washing.
e. Chemical washes such as acids may be applied to excellent advantage.
f. When applicable, hydraulic perforating (low volume high velocity, high pressure jet stream
of sand-fluid slurry) may be used to perforate. This procedure is usually not as damaging.
3. Perforating Fluid
The fluid across the interval at the time of perforating should be a clear fluid containing no
undissolved solids. Solid particles in dirty completion fluid may be driven into the formation by the
force of the perforating charge and can cause impaired permeability. This interferes with injection
of treating fluids and with production after sand control is established. The practice of filtering
workover fluids and treating fluids is becoming more and more prevalent. Filters as low as 2
microns are being used regularly. Alarming amounts of solid material can be removed from
supposedly clean fluids.
D. Open Hole Completions
The greatest potential for fluid production from a formation can be realized by using open hole
26
completions as described by Hill. Curves in Figure 1-23 suggest that it would require four ideal
0.5-inch perforations per ft, penetrating casing and cement sheath, plus eight additional inches
25
into the formation, to equal open hole productivity. Thus, to approach open hole productivity, an
opening or cavity into the formation beyond the perforation tunnel is required. Such an opening
must be held open in unconsolidated sands by gravel or artificial consolidation of the surrounding
formation.
Productivity of an open hole completion can theoretically by increased by underreaming or
26
opening the hole to a larger size. Comparable production performance is difficult to obtain in a
3
perforated completion.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 23

X. PERFORATION CLEANING
Perforation debris removal is considered an important step in well completion procedure. In addition to
removing perforating debris, such methods also should recover mud cake and mud pockets from the
cement-formation interface which have been shown to cause problems with injectivity. This is very
important when attempting to consolidate formations with sequentially injected resin systems.
Although possible, treating a formation behind more than one perforation by pumping through a single
perforation is not very dependable. Little or no vertical permeability can cause perforations to remain
untreated. If a single perforation is plugged, the formation behind it may remain untreated. Since the
permeability and flow geometry can be altered after treatment, the plugging material in a perforation may
5, 3
be ejected when the well is placed on production. Sand production may then resume.
When mechanical means of control are used, well preparation is equally important. To obtain a uniform
pack and to provide for adequate flow of fluid when the well is being produced, a maximum number of
perforations should be open.
Removal methods include: backflow, backsurge, perforation washing, and chemical washes.
A. Backflow
Perforating is sometimes conducted in mud with an overbalance, followed by backflow to establish
injectivity. However, backflow without underbalance perforating may not clean up all perforations
3
as the differential required to purge debris and mud from some perforations may not be reached.
B. Perforation Washing
Perforation washing is a positive method of removing perforation debris, mud, and formation sand
from the perforation tunnel and from behind the casing. Figure 1-24 shows one variation of this
method which has been widely applied. An opposed cup packer is employed to isolate as little as
1 foot of perforated interval at a time. Acids or other clean fluids can be injected through the
isolated perforations to establish communication through all perforations.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 24

C. Backsurging
Backsurging, or just surging, introduced to the U.S. Gulf Coast several years ago, has proved
highly successful in providing clean perforations. The method exposes perforations
instantaneously to greatly lowered pressure to draw out a limited volume of perforating debris,
mud, formation sand, and reservoir fluid.
The most common method utilizes the backsurge tool. (Figure 1-25). The tool consists of a
treating packer, an atmospheric chamber which can be one or more joints of drill string or tubing,
3
and two valves -- one above and one below the air chamber.
To operate the tool, the lower quick opening disc valve is opened to suddenly expose the
perforated interval below the packer to lower pressure. The sudden surge of fluid into the wellbore
3
withdraws plugging material from perforations.
Air chamber volumes of at least five gallons per perforation are reported to have improved
productivity four to five times that of non-backsurged completions. Even larger air chamber
volumes are desirable occasionally.
A painted tailpipe has been run below the backsurge tool to give indication of perforation
effectiveness. The paint is eroded away opposite open perforations. When too few perforations
are indicated to be open, the interval can be reperforated or the backsurge tool re-run. A flapper
valve may be employed on the bottom to the tail pipe to trap recovered debris which may reduce
3
the need for removal by circulating.

D. Chemical Washes
Most of the trash, debris and formation damage is susceptible to removal with chemical washes,
such as acids. In many cases, acid solutions are pumped into the formation ahead of the sand
control treatment. In certain cases, removal of acid from the formation prior to treatment is not
required.
E. Summary
The above described procedures are of utmost importance in achieving good results from any
sand control service. Also, the Sand Control Guidelines at the beginning of this book should be
reviewed. Well preparation and pretreatment for cleaning the wellbore and perforation tunnel are
extremely important and failure to assign priority to this phase of sand control work imparts
nearly certain failure to all other related efforts.

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/96

Sand Control Theory

Page 25

REFERENCES
1

Decker, L. R. & Carnes, J. D., Current Sand Control Practices IPA, Jakarta, Indonesia, May, 1977

2.

Maly, George P., Close Attention to the Smallest Job Details Vital for Minimizing Formation
Damage, SPE 5702 Houston, Jan. 1976.

Suman, George O., Sand Control Handbook, World Oil, 1976.

4.

Rike, J. L., Shortcomings of Present Sand-Control Methods Suggest New Fail-Safe Concept, Oil &
Gas Journal, 1975.

5.

Ayres, H. J. & Ramos, J., Guidelines to Sand Control, Petroleum Engineer, July. Sept. and Oct.
1972.

6.

Saucier, R. J., Gravel Pack Design Considerations, SPE 4030, San Antonio, TX., Oct. 1972.

7.

Krumbein, W. C. & Sloss, L. L., Stratigraphy and Sedimentation, W. H. Freeman and Co., Oct.,
1978.

8.

Rensvold, Roger F., Full Scale Gravel Pack Model Studies, EUR 39, London, England, Oct., 1978.

9.

Maly, George P., et al, New Gravel Pack Tool for Improving Pack Placement, Journal of Petroleum
Technology, Jan., 1974.

10. Shryock, Steven G., Gravel Packing Studies in a Full-Scale, Deviated Model Wellbore, SPE 9421,
Dallas, TX., Sept. 1980.
11. Carnes James D., Internal Halliburton Research Report, Study of Fracpac Sand/Formation Sand
Intermixing, April, 1971.
12. Sparlin, Derry & Copeland, Travis, Pressure Packing With Concentrated Gravel Slurry, SPE 4033,
San Antonio, Oct., 1972.
13. Lybarger, L. H. & Scheuerman, R. F., Water-Base, Viscous Gravel Pack System Results in High
Productivity in Gulf Coast Completions, SPE 4774, New Orleans, Feb., 1974.
14. Sparlin, D. D., US Patent 3,498,380, Method of Placing Gravel Packs, March, 1870.
15. Cirigliano, J. A. & Leiback, R. E., Gravel Packing in Venezuela, Mexico City, April, 1967.
16. Shryock, Steven G., Preliminary Results From Full-Scale Gravel Packing Studies, J.P.T., 1979.
17. Smith, Charles W. V., et al, Recommended Practices for Testing Sand Used in Gravel Packing
Operations, API Subcommittee Report, Fifth Draft, Jan., 1982.
18. Bezemer, C. & Meijo, F. H., Development and Field Applications of the Process for Sand
Consolidation Employing EPOSAND Resin, SPE 1591, Dallas, TX., Oct., 1966.
19. Young, Bill M., Consolidation Technique in Clayey Sands Boost Flow Rate, Oil & Gas Journal, Vol.
65, No. 38.
20. Murphey, J. R. & Totty, K. D., Sand Consolidation Systems Placed with Water:, SPE 5031, Houston,
TX., Oct., 1974.
21. Young, Bill M., US Patent 3,625,287 issued Dec. 7, 1971 entitled: Method of Improving Strength and
Stability of Sand Consolidations Made with Resin Systems.
22. Hower, Polysaccharide Polymer, March, 1981.W. A. & Brown, W., Larger Scale Laboratory
Investigations of Sand Consolidation Techniques, SPE 1921, March, 1961.
23. Carnes, J. D. & Mixon, A., Consolidate and Gravel Pack in One Step, SPE 3593, New Orleans,
Oct., 1971.
24. Murphey, J. R., US Patent 4,259,205, Process Involving Breaking of Aqueous Gel of Neutral
25. Harris, M. H., The Effect of Perforating On Well Productivity, Trans. AIME (1966) 237, 518-528.
26. Hill, K. E., Factors Affecting the Use of Gravel in Oil Wells, API Drilling & Production Practices,
1941

Copyright Halliburton Company 1996

12/26

Sand Control Theory

Page 26