See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266049156

High-Productivity Horizontal Gravel Packs

Article · June 2001

CITATIONS READS

13 209

17 authors, including:

Jean Desroches Mehmet Parlar

Schlumberger Limited Schlumberger Limited
78 PUBLICATIONS   1,366 CITATIONS    111 PUBLICATIONS   505 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Multi-stage fracturing View project

Sand Control View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehmet Parlar on 06 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 High-Productivity Horizontal Gravel Packs

Syed Ali To increase productivity and reduce cost and complexity, horizontal wells often
Rick Dickerson
Chevron are completed without casing across pay intervals. Stand-alone screens have
Houston, Texas, USA been used in openholes, but increasingly, operators are gravel packing long
Clive Bennett intervals to stabilize boreholes, provide more reliable completions and mitigate
BP
London, England sand-related problems such as erosion, surface handling and disposal.

Pat Bixenman
Mehmet Parlar
Colin Price-Smith Loose formation grains and fine particles such as
Rosharon, Texas clays may be produced along with oil, gas and
water from unconsolidated reservoirs. Installing
Steve Cooper completions to control sand without sacrificing
BP productivity, flow control or recoverable reserves
Aberdeen, Scotland is challenging and expensive—as much as
$3 million or more offshore. Costs of subsequent
Jean Desroches
treatments to mitigate damage and future reme-
Sugar Land, Texas
dial interventions also are extremely high—up
Bill Foxenberg to $1 million per job in deepwater and subsea
M-I Drilling Fluids wells. Operators need reliable sand-control
Houston, Texas measures, implemented correctly the first time,
especially for horizontal, openhole wells in high-
Keith Godwin permeability formations.
Stone Energy Corporation Sand production, or sanding, is a function of
Lafayette, Louisiana, USA rock strength, in-situ stresses, produced fluids
and changes in flow rate related to pressure
Tim McPike
drop, or drawdown. High production rates,
Shell International E&P
increasing effective stress due to depletion, and
Rijswijk, The Netherlands
water breakthrough contribute to sanding.
Enzo Pitoni Problems associated with produced sand range
Giuseppe Ripa from surface handling and disposal to erosion of
Eni Agip subsurface or surface equipment and loss of well
Milan, Italy control.1 If sand causes tubular or completion-
equipment failures, production and reserve
Bill Steven recovery can be delayed, or even lost, when costs
Texaco to sidetrack or redrill a well are prohibitive.
Warri, Nigeria Operators use various techniques to minimize
sand in produced fluids (next page). Sand-control
Dave Tiffin
methods include limiting well flow to rates below
BP
Houston, Texas the onset of sanding, in-situ consolidation, selec-
tive or oriented perforating, gravel packing and
Juan Troncoso frac packing.2 Frac packing combines short, wide
Repsol-YPF ClearPAC, MudSOLV, NODAL, QUANTUM and SandCADE
Jakarta, Indonesia are marks of Schlumberger. AllPAC and Alternate Path are
marks of ExxonMobil; this technology is licensed exclu-
sively to Schlumberger.
hydraulic fractures, or tip-screenout designs,
with gravel packing. To control sand in openhole
completions, operators use stand-alone screens,
gravel packs, frac packs, and recently, expand-
able screens (see “Emerging Sand-Control
Techniques,” page 72).
Restricting production, although successful in
the past, adversely impacts well profitability and
is not practical in today’s economy, especially for
high-cost, high-rate wells. In-situ consolidation
locks sand grains in place by injecting resins and
catalysts into formations, generally through per-
forations in casing. Chemical placement and
diversion across large zones and all perforations
are difficult. Selective and oriented perforating
attempt to prevent sand production by avoiding
weakly consolidated intervals or aligning perfo-
rations with maximum in-situ stresses to
increase perforation stability.3
An effective and widely used sand-control
method, gravel packing places granular media, or
gravel, around mechanical filters, or metal
screens, inside perforated casing or openhole.4
The “gravel” is clean, round natural sand or syn-
thetic material that is small enough to exclude
formation grains and some fine particles from
produced fluids, but large enough to be held in
place by screens. A gravel and carrier-fluid slurry
is pumped into perforations and the annulus
between screens and perforated casing or open-
hole. Gravel is deposited as carrier fluid leaks
into formations or circulates back to surface
through the screens.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Hal Riordan,
Houston, Texas, USA; and Ray Tibbles, Rosharon, Texas.

52 Oilfield Review
 In-Situ Consolidation and
Selective or Oriented Perforating Cased-Hole Gravel Pack Cased-Hole Frac Pack

Cement Intermediate
casing Blank pipe

Resin Screens

Fracture

Perforations Gravel

Production
casing

Openhole Stand-Alone Screen Openhole Gravel Pack

Production
casing

Filter cake

Openhole
Horizontal stand-alone screen Horizontal gravel-packed screen
in openhole in openhole
Screens

Gravel

> Sand control. Selective or oriented perforating avoids weak zones and minimizes sand production; cemented casing provides positive zonal isolation.
Cased-hole gravel packing provides sand control in laminated formations, lower quality sands or marginally economic vertical wells. Frac packing
combines stimulation and sand control in stacked pay or reservoirs with poorly sorted grains and low fluid transmissibility. In openhole, stand-alone
screens control sand in “clean” formations with large well-sorted grains and wells with short producing lives. Openhole gravel packs or frac packs
maintain productivity or injectivity longer than stand-alone screens in “dirty” formations with poorly sorted grains, high-rate wells with higher
transmissibility and large reserves, and high-cost, high-risk deepwater or subsea completions.

In some areas and under certain formation
conditions, stand-alone screens may be an alter-
native to gravel packing or frac packing. Initial
productivity from screen-only completions is usu-
ally good, but solids can eventually plug screens.
In contrast, gravel packs tend to maintain pro-
ductivity and sand-control integrity for longer
periods because of increased wellbore stability.
However, many screen-only completions fail to
adequately exclude sand. Other wells completed
without gravel packing have not failed com-
pletely, but produce at reduced rates because of
plugged or eroded stand-alone screens.
1. Carlson J, Gurley D, King G, Price-Smith C and Walters F:
“Sand Control: Why and How?” Oilfield Review 4, no. 4
(October 1992): 41-53.
2. Hydraulic fracturing uses specialized fluids injected at
pressures above the formation breakdown stress to cre-
ate two fracture wings, or 180-degree opposed cracks,
extending away from a wellbore. These fracture wings
propagate perpendicular to the least rock stress in a
preferred fracture plane (PFP). Held open by a proppant,
these conductive pathways increase effective well
radius, allowing linear flow into the fractures and to the
well. Common proppants are naturally occurring or
resin-coated sand and high-strength bauxite or ceramic
synthetics, sized by screening according to standard US
mesh sieves.
In standard fracturing, the fracture tip is the final area
that is packed with proppant. A tip-screenout design
causes proppant to pack, or bridge, near the end of the
fractures in early stages of a treatment. As additional
proppant-laden fluid is pumped, the fractures can no
longer propagate deeper into a formation and begin to
widen or balloon. This technique creates a wider, more
conductive pathway as proppant is packed back toward
the wellbore.
3. Behrmann L, Brook JE, Farrant S, Fayard A,
Venkitaraman A, Brown, A, Michel C, Noordermeer A,
Smith P and Underdown D: “Perforating Practices That
Optimize Productivity,” Oilfield Review 12, no. 1 (Spring
2000): 52-74.
4. Sherlock-Willis TM, Morales RH and Price P: “A Global
Perspective on Sand Control Treatments,” paper SPE
50652, presented at the SPE European Petroleum Confer-
ence, The Hague, The Netherlands, October 20-22, 1998.
Parlar M and Albino EH: “Challenges, Accomplishments,
and Recent Developments in Gravel Packing,” Journal of
Petroleum Technology 52, no. 1 (January 2000): 50-58.

Summer 2001 53
 As a result, there is a trend among operators Cased-Hole Frac-Pack Productivity
toward gravel packing to protect screens and
provide better sandface completions. Sizing
gravel correctly and completely packing the
annulus stabilize formations and protect screens
from erosion and gradual plugging. However, High flow efficiency
standard drilling and gravel-packing operations
100
may trap mud and carrier-fluid residue between

Flow efficiency, %
Best-fit curve for 12 high-rate wells Best-fit curve for 8 high-rate wells
gravel and formations or within the gravel pack,
damaging both reservoir and pack permeabilities.
Completion-induced damage results in high flow-
initiation or drawdown pressures and reduced
productivity after gravel packing. This is espe- 10
cially true when low-cost, conventional fluid sys-
Reduced flow efficiency
tems are used without regard for performance.
This article focuses on gravel packing of hori-
zontal, openhole wells. We review sand-control
measures, including stand-alone screens, water
packing and Alternate Path, or shunt-screen, 1
technology. We discuss challenges and recent 1 10 100 1000
developments in carrier fluids and filter-cake Mobility (Kh/µ), 1000 mD-ft/cp
removal. Case histories demonstrate state-of- > Casing or openhole? Production data demonstrate the impact of perforated casing on well
the-art wellbore cleanup, including chemicals, inflow performance. In reservoirs with lower transmissibility—permeability times height (kh)
procedures and tools. Gravel-placement sim- divided by fluid viscosity (µ)—below about 40,000 mD-ft/cp, flow efficiency is high for perforated,
ulation, techniques for gravel packing above frac- cased-hole completions with frac-packs for sand control and stimulation. In high-rate wells,
however, stimulation benefits can be lost when reservoir kh is high or fluid viscosity is low
turing pressure or with oil-base fluids and because flow is choked by perforations. In formations with kh/µ greater than 40,000 mD-ft/cp,
expandable screens also are included. operators should consider openhole completions and, if possible, horizontal sections in pay
intervals to avoid reduced flow efficiency from perforation restrictions and turbulence.
Casing or Openhole? Stand-alone screens, openhole gravel packs and screens that expand against borehole
walls are sand-control options for high-transmissibility reservoirs.
Horizontal and high-angle drilling are common for
new and reentry wells even in reservoirs requiring
sand-control completions. Cased-hole comple-
tions are uncommon in horizontal wells because
cementing casing is difficult, perforating costs are
300-ft/min [91-m/min] displacement rate Loose filter cake,
higher, and perforation cleanup to achieve effi- or "fluff"
cient gravel packing often is problematic.
Horizontal openholes also are less sensitive to
drilling and completion damage because of sig- Filter cake
nificantly larger inflow areas. However, horizontal
sections are drilled with specialized reservoir Borehole wall
drilling fluid (RDF) that contains primary polymers
for viscosity, bridging agents like sized calcium
carbonate [CaCO3] or sodium chloride [NaCl] salt Formation
0.04 in.
and additives (usually starch or another polymer)
1 mm
tailored to control fluid loss (right).5
> Filter cake. A properly formulated and conditioned reservoir drilling fluid (RDF) deposits a thin,
low-permeability filter cake on borehole walls that does not deeply invade formations. Components
include polymers for viscosity, bridging and weighting agents, and fluid-loss additives that seal within
a few formation-grain diameters to minimize fluid and particulate invasion of productive intervals.
Base brines, salts, CaCO3 and barite are common weighting agents. Bridging agents and fluid-loss
additives pack against a borehole wall. Proper RDF conditioning and wellbore displacements remove
loose RDF material, or “fluff,” and minimize filter-cake thickness.

54 Oilfield Review
 Exposing more of the reservoir to a wellbore
increases productivity and injectivity while
reducing pressure drop and decreasing flow
velocities in formations. Less drawdown and
lower fluid velocities also minimize sand produc-
tion in some formations. Because cased-hole
perforations and flow turbulence limit productiv-
ity, particularly in high-rate wells, operators often
complete horizontal wells openhole for optimal
productivity.6 Using reservoir transmissibility—
permeability times height (kh) divided by fluid vis-
cosity (µ)—as a basis, BP evaluated frac-packed,
cased-hole well productivity in terms of flow effi-
ciency (previous page, top).7
As reservoir-fluid viscosity increases or per-
meability and net-to-gross pay decrease—less
productive pay, more silts and shales—operators
may need to frac-pack wells for stimulation
and sand control in laminated or layered reser-
voirs. As reservoir-fluid viscosity decreases or
formation permeability and net-to-gross pay
increase—more productive pay, fewer silts and
shales—perforated casing reduces production
efficiency and stimulation benefits may be
negated because flow is choked by perforations.
In high-permeability, high-productivity forma-
tions, operators should consider openhole comple-
tions with high-angle or horizontal sections in
reservoirs, and stand-alone screens, gravel packs
or expandable screens for sand control. Openhole
completions requiring sand control almost doubled
from 1997 to 2000. Of these wells, about
20% were gravel packed in 1997 and 1998 com-
pared with 40% in 2000. This trend is projected to
continue, reaching about 60% in 2003.8 Controlling
sand production in long, horizontal openholes
requires new technologies, detailed engineering,
advanced planning and care execution.
Stand-Alone Screens or Gravel Packing?
In the 1980s and early 1990s, stand-alone screens
were the primary sand-control option for horizon-
tal openholes. Gravel packing long sections was
not considered feasible. Operators installed con-
ventional wire-wrap screens in openholes with-
out gravel packing, but eventually turned to
prepacked and premium-mesh designs for better
performance and reliability (above right).
Because of larger inflow areas, initial produc-
tivity from horizontal screen-only completions is
usually higher and flow rates per unit length of
wellbore are lower than in vertical wells.
However, many screen-only completions lose
productivity as formation solids plug screens,
eventually failing because of increased sand pro-
duction from high-velocity erosion of remaining
Summer 2001
Wire wrap
Wire-Wrap Screen Prepacked Screen
High-
Perforated permeability
basepipe gravel
Protective
cover
Porous-membrane,
fiber or metal-sintered
laminate
Premium-Mesh Screen
> Sand-control screens (Courtesy of U.S. Filter/Johnson Screens). Wire-wrap
screens, the most common design, generally consist of a drilled or slotted
basepipe with wire filters spaced to retain specific gravel sizes. In early
versions, fluids flowed only through openings in the basepipe, so ribs, or rods,
were added to form a small annulus for increased flow capacity and to reduce
plugging. Prepacked screens are manufactured with high-permeability resin-
coated gravel between two layers of wire-wrap filter media. Premium-mesh
screen designs use a specialized wire-cloth media around a wire-wrap-screen.
These screens usually include a shroud with drilled holes for additional pro-
tection during installation or have openings designed to reduce erosion caused
by sand grains and fine particles impacting directly on the internal filter media
at high velocity.
open screen areas. At first, stand-alone screens and lack of filter-cake cleanup led to screen
were run in unconditioned drilling mud instead of plugging and low productivity.
clean, filtered completion fluid. Poor mud filtering Installing screens in openhole without
and conditioning, inadequate wellbore displace- gravel packing is successful in many wells,
ments after drilling and before installing screens but effectiveness and reliability vary.9
5. Houwen O, Ladva H, Meeten G, Reid P and Williamson D: 8. Parlar M, Bennett, Gilchrist J, Elliott F, Troncoso J,
“A New Slogan for Drilling Fluids Engineers,” Oilfield Price-Smith C, Brady M, Tibbles RJ, Kelkar S, Hoxha B
Review 9, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 2-16. and Foxenberg WE: “Emerging Techniques in Gravel
Packing Open-Hole Horizontal Completions in High-
6. Tiffin D, Stevens B, Park E, Elliott F and Gilchrist J:
“Evaluation of Filter Cake Flowback in Sand Control Performance Wells,” paper SPE 64412, presented at the
Completions,” paper SPE 68933, presented at the SPE SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, October 16-18, 2000.
European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague,
The Netherlands, May 21-22, 2001. 9. Richard BM, Montagna JM and Penberthy WL Jr :
7. Bennett CL: “Sand Control Design for Open Hole Comple- “Horizontal Completions—2 Stand-Alone Screens Vary in
tions,” SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program presenta- Effectiveness,” Oil & Gas Journal 95, no. 32 (August 11,
tions, September 1999 to May 2000. 1997): 63-69.
55
 grain sizes and particle sorting in addition to bore-
hole stability and the number of silt and shale
Likelihood of solids production (rock strength and in-situ stresses)

Field F intervals exposed to openhole sections.

Openhole gravel pack Field I Field H Field G
High

Most screen-only completions in Gulf of

Field F1 Field E
Mexico horizontal wells fail during the first three
years of production, and average time for screen-
only failures in the North Sea is about three to
Openhole gravel pack or expandable screens four years.11 If flow rates are not high and
Field D
Medium

expected productive life is two to three years,

Field A stand-alone screens may be a good solution for
Field B wells with limited reserves because of lower
Field C
installation costs. In addition to rock strength and
permeability, determining factors for screen and
Premium-mesh stand-alone screens gravel selection are formation grain-size sorting
Low

and uniformity and fines content (next page,

Conventional stand-alone screens top).12 Uniformity is an indication of variation in
formation grains from larger to smaller sizes.
No sand control
Sorting is a measure of the range from coarse to
Low Medium High fine formation particles.
Sand quality (net pay, particle sorting and uniformity, formation homogeneity and permeability) If the risk of producing sand is limited, stand-
alone screens can be used in “clean” (low fines
content), homogeneous sands with high net-to-
Major depletion Pressure support Gulf of Mexico North Sea Other gross pay and uniformly sorted, large grains—
expected (poor aquifer (good aquifer support,
support, depletion, gas or water injection) median sizes (D50) greater than 200 µm—such as
compaction drive, those in the North Sea.13 For weak sandstones
or gas blowdown)
with medium-size grains—median size (D50) of
> Stand-alone screen or openhole gravel pack? A crossplot of likely solids production with about 125 µm—primary factors to consider are
respect to formation sand quality helps operators develop guidelines for evaluating and grain size uniformity and fines content. If forma-
selecting completion methods. Wells in low- to medium-quality reservoirs with a high probability
of producing sand may need openhole gravel packs, but wells in high-quality sandstones with
tions have poorly sorted grains or a fines content
similar likelihood of sanding can be completed with stand-alone conventional wire-wrap, greater than 5%, operators should consider
prepacked or premium-mesh screens. In reservoirs with gas and water injection or strong gravel packing to combat sand erosion and
aquifers for pressure support and medium- to high-quality sands, screen-only completions screen plugging from fines migration.
may be adequate, while reservoirs of similar quality with depletion, or compaction, drive may
have to be gravel packed. Weakly consolidated sandstones with small
grains, as in many Gulf of Mexico formations,
typically contain high percentages of dispersed
Initially, failure rates averaged 50 to 65% stand-alone screen completions, however, pro- fines and clays—particles less than 44 µm—that
for screen-only completions, but decreased to duce at restricted rates because of sand produc- make stand-alone screens impractical. Wells in
about 20% as drilling fluids and cleanup tion, screen plugging and erosion, and are not yet “dirty” (high fines content) or nonhomogeneous
techniques improved.10 Wells with reactive silts classified as failures. unconsolidated formations with low permeability
and shales still have high failure rates caused by Operating companies and service providers and poorly sorted, small grains—median sizes
sand production and reduced productivity due to continue to develop guidelines and define criteria (D50) of about 80 µm—should be gravel packed
plugging of stand-alone screens. In the North for selecting sand-control techniques in horizontal because stand-alone screens may not maintain
Sea, recovery factors for screen-only wells gener- openhole wells (above). The choice between productivity and provide reliable long-term sand
ally meet expectations; sand-control failures have stand-alone screens and gravel packing depends control. Frac packing also is an option.
been low, but have increased over time. Some on formation permeability, clay and fines content, In high-cost, high-rate wells, expensive reme-
10. Bennett C, Gilchrist JM, Pitoni E, Burton RC, Hodge RM, 12. Tiffin DL, King GE, Larese RE and Britt LK: “New Criteria
dial interventions may affect field profitability or
Troncoso J, Ali SA, Dickerson R, Price-Smith C and for Gravel and Screen Selection for Sand Control,” overall project economics. In fact, most gas-
Parlar M: “Design Methodology for Selection of paper SPE 39437, presented at the SPE International
Horizontal Open-Hole Sand Control Completions Symposium on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette,
delivery contracts have major monetary penalties
Supported by Field Case Histories,” paper SPE 65140, Louisiana, USA, February 18-19, 1998. for defaulting on production quotas. For these
presented at the SPE European Petroleum Conference, Bennett et al, reference 10.
Paris, France, October 24-25, 2000.
cost- and risk-sensitive completions, uncertainty
13. The designation “D” in analysis of grain-size distribu-
11. Perdue JM: “Completion Experts Study Gulf of Mexico tions is the mesh opening that retains a specific cumula-
and historically high failure rates for stand-alone
Horizontal Screen Failures, Petroleum Engineer tive percent of particles. For example, D50 is the mesh screens justify gravel packing.
International 69, no. 6 (June 1996): 31-32. opening, in inches millimeters or microns (µm) above
McLarty J: “How to Complete a Horizontal Well in the which 50% of the formation or gravel—sand or synthetic
Gulf of Mexico: Operators Share Experiences,” proppant—particles are retained.
Petroleum Engineer International 70, no. 11 (November 14. Parlar and Albino, reference 4.
1997): 63-70.
Penberthy Jr WL, Bickham KL and Nguyen HT:
Schlumberger internal horizontal-well database. “Horizontal Completions—Conclusion: Gravel Packing
Prevents Productivity Decline,” Oil & Gas Journal 95,
no. 35 (September 1, 1997): 56-60.

56 Oilfield Review
 Stand-Alone Screen and Gravel-Pack Criteria for Completion Design Unless formations have extremely clean,
well-sorted grains, subsea production and injec-
Formation characteristics
Completion tion wells that may produce sand and most
type deepwater—greater than 1000 to 2000 ft [305 to
Sorting coefficient Uniformity coefficient Content of fines
D10/D95 D40/D90 less than 44 µm 610 m]—completions should be gravel packed
Wire-wrap or to avoid costly remedial interventions, espe-
Less than 10 Less than 3 Less than 2% prepacked screens
cially when large reserve volumes are involved.
Premium-mesh High-rate gas wells also need to be gravel
Less than 10 Less than 5 Less than 5% screens
packed when sanding and screen erosion cause
Greater than 10 Greater than 5 Greater than 5% Openhole
gravel pack safety concerns.
Stand-alone screens may be justifiable in
certain applications:
> Screen and gravel-pack criteria. As formations become less uniform, completion
• nonsubsea wells with a short productive life
selection needs to incorporate parameters other than median (D50) grain sizes
from sieve analysis. Sorting coefficient D10/D95, uniformity coefficient D40/D90 and and uniform hole collapse, regardless of rate
percentage of 44-µm and finer particles address formation quality and influence • low-rate nonsubsea wells with few shale or
screen and gravel-pack designs. For example, in wells with sorting coefficient silt intervals and partial or no hole collapse
greater than 10, uniformity coefficient greater than 5 and 44-micron fines content • nonsubsea injection wells with a small wellbore-
greater than 5%, an openhole gravel pack may be the most appropriate choice.
screen annulus that limits flow around screens.
Marginal economics, capital investment limi-
tations, potential completion damage or produc-
tivity reduction and loss of zonal isolation are
Casing reasons not to gravel pack openhole horizontal
Slurry Beta wave Screens wells. However, most operators agree that gravel
Heel Toe
packing is preferred in horizontal openhole wells
10 9 8 7 6
to reduce sand-related failures and minimize
associated productivity decline. High-pressure,
high-temperature (HPHT) wells may be excep-
tions because of fluid performance and compati-
1 2 3 4 5 bility limitations. These HPHT sand-control
applications present challenges for completion
Wash pipe Blank pipe Gravel dune Alpha wave Openhole Filter cake engineers and are currently under evaluation.

Water Packing or Alternate Path Screens?

Typical Surface Treating-Pressure Response for Water Packing
Openhole gravel packing has evolved as operators
Screen Washpipe and service companies gain experience and a bet-
ter understanding of completion damage and
Surface treating pressure, psi

Preflush stage
gravel placement in horizontal wells. If gravel
Alpha wave: slurry transport Annular packing is required, operators must choose
along the screens packoff
between two field-proven techniques currently
Slurry stage available for completing long openhole sections—
water packing and Alternate Path screens.
Slurry at toe of well Beta wave: gravel Water packing uses low gravel concentra-
packing from toe to heel tions—0.5 to 2 pounds of proppant added (ppa) per
Displacement stage
gallon [0.06 to 0.2 g/cm3]—transported in low-vis-
Treatment duration, min cosity carrier fluids, usually brine (left).14
> Water packing. Gravel packing with low-viscosity fluids, usually brine, relies on deposition of
gravel around screens on the low side of an annulus, while slurry with low gravel concentrations
moves in turbulent flow along the top (top and bottom right). The borehole must be sealed with an
RDF filter cake to minimize fluid leakoff. If circulation—fluid returns to surface—is maintained,
gravel moves toward the far end, or toe, of horizontal sections in an “alpha” wave (1 to 5). If a slurry
dehydrates and forward packing ceases in intervals with high fluid losses, gravel fills the annulus
and forms a bridge. The result is an incomplete pack beyond that point. After bridging occurs or
gravel reaches the toe, packing proceeds back toward the beginning, or heel, of a horizontal section
in a “beta” wave (6 to 10). Surface treating pressures provide an indication of how water-packing
treatments are progressing (bottom left).

Summer 2001 57
 Casing Slurry Shunt tube Nozzles
Heel Toe

2
1 4 5

Washpipe Blankpipe Gravel Screen Openhole Filter cake

Typical Surface Treating-Pressure Response for Shunt-Tube Screens Nozzle

Shunt
Alpha wave: slurry transport
Surface treating pressure, psi

tube
along the screens
Slurry at toe of well Annular packoff
Preflush stage

Slurry stage

Pressure increase
as flow diverts
Displacement stage into shunt tube
Gravel forms
Treatment duration, min
Screen Washpipe
> Alternate Path gravel packing. This technology ensures a complete gravel pack around screens
across an entire horizontal section. Shunt tubes attached on the outside of screens provide conduits
for slurry to bypass gravel bridges and fill annular voids (top and bottom right). Shunt packing does not
depend on filter cake to prevent fluid loss. If the annulus between screens and openhole packs off
prematurely (3), slurry diverts into the shunts and gravel packing proceeds toward the toe even with
no fluid returns, or circulation, to surface (4 and 5). Pump rate usually is reduced after shunt flow
begins and pressure increases because of small shunt-tube diameters (bottom left).

The low side of an annulus is packed first until
gravel reaches the far end, also called the toe, or
until gravel packs off and forms a bridge because
of high fluid leakoff. Gravitational forces domi-
nate this “alpha” wave, so gravel settles like
wind-blown sand dunes on a beach until reach-
ing an equilibrium height. If fluid flow remains
above critical velocity for particle transport,
gravel will move down a horizontal section
toward the toe.
After the alpha wave stops, a second, or
“beta,” wave packs the annulus topside back
toward the beginning of a horizontal section, also
called the heel, from the toe or a bridge. The beta
wave requires enough fluid velocity to maintain
turbulent flow and move gravel along the top of a
wellbore annulus. This wave continues until space
between pack and formation becomes small rela-
tive to gravel particle size. Low-permeability filter
cake is required to prevent fluid loss into forma-
tions, maintain equilibrium gravel height, avoid
gravel bridging, which leads to incomplete pack-
ing, and allow screens to be installed without dif-
ferential sticking. Reduced annular flow as a result
of fluid loss from filter-cake erosion or exceeding
fracturing pressure increases downstream gravel
height and the possibility of premature bridging
and voids in packs.
Water packing relies heavily on filter-cake
integrity and may not completely pack the annu-
lus, which may introduce uncertainty about com-
pletion success and consistency. For this reason,
specialized and carefully designed RDF is used to
drill openhole reservoir sections. An RDF should
form thin, low-permeability filter cake that is brit-
tle, but able to withstand erosion while gravel is
being pumped. These characteristics make filter
cake easier to remove or, at least, less damaging
to formation permeability.15
If required, cleanup treatments must follow
water packing to maintain filter-cake integrity
while placing gravel. In reservoirs with low net-
to-gross pay, silt and shale intervals exposed to
completion fluids can be eroded and transported
by high-velocity flow for long periods, potentially
reducing final gravel-pack permeability. Using
prepacked or premium-mesh screens to control
sand in case of an incomplete pack compensates
somewhat for water-packing limitations, but a
more reliable method was needed.
Alternate Path gravel packing uses shunts on
the outside of screens and high gravel concen-
trations—4 to 8 ppa [0.48 to 0.96 g/cm3]—in
viscous carrier fluids to ensure complete gravel
packs below bridges that form between screens
and casing or openhole (above).16 Unlike water
packing, this technique does not rely on filter-
cake integrity. If an annular gravel bridge forms,
pressure in the annulus increases and slurry
diverts into shunt tubes, the only open flow path.
Shunt tubes provide conduits for slurry to bypass
collapsed hole, external inflatable packers or
annular gravel bridges at the top of intervals or
adjacent to zones with high fluid leakoff.17
15. Pitoni E, Ballard DA and Kelly RM: “Changes in Solids
Composition of Reservoir Drill in Fluids During Drilling
and the Impact on Filter Cake Properties,” paper SPE
54753, presented at the SPE European Formation
Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands,
May 31-June 1, 1999.
16. Jones LG, Yeh CS, Yates TJ, Bryant DW, Doolittle MW
and Healy JC: “Alternate Path Gravel Packing,”
paper SPE 22796, presented at the 66th SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA,
October 6-9, 1991.
17. Shunt-screen technology was developed by Mobil
(now ExxonMobil), in the late 1980s and early 1990s and
licensed to Schlumberger.

58 Oilfield Review
 Effect of Formation Permeability Effect of Skin
Large-scale tests simulating extremely high 1.0 1.0
0.5 500 mD 0.5 Skin=10
leakoff proved that single shunt tubes could pack 0 0

Normalized radius
Normalized radius
2000-ft horizontal intervals even with no fluid -0.5 -0.5
returns to surface.18 Engineers adapted Alternate -1.0 -1.0
1.0 1.0
Path screens for longer horizontal openholes by 0.5 5000 mD 0.5 Skin=100
designing nozzles and shunts that reduce gravel 0 0
buildup inside shunts, by using nondamaging flu- -0.5 -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
ids with good gravel-carrying capacity and by 12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7 12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7
installing pipe shrouds with drilled holes around Measured depth, ft Measured depth, ft
the entire assembly to help centralize screens Effect of Wash-Pipe OD/Screen ID Effect of Fluid Viscosity
1.0 1.0
and protect shunt tubes. 0.4 cp
0.5 OD/ID=0.8 0.5
Gravel does not make turns into small exit 0 0

Normalized radius
Normalized radius
ports easily, so large angled nozzles extending -0.5 -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
into the flow stream reduce the tendency for
1.0 1.0
gravel to settle and concentrate inside shunts. 0.5 OD/ID=0.3 0.5 4 cp
Shunts with ports, or nozzles, serve as packing 0 0
-0.5 -0.5
tubes. For extremely long intervals, transport -1.0
-1.0
shunts without exit ports are attached along the 12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7 12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7
entire length of screen assemblies to limit slurry Measured depth, ft Measured depth, ft
dehydration by reducing carrier-fluid leakoff into Effect of Gravel Concentration Effect of Pump Rate
1.0 1.0
the annulus and deliver slurry to packing tubes at 0.5 1 ppa 0.5 4 bbl/min
4 to 6 bbl/min [0.6 to 0.9 m3/min]. 0 0
Normalized radius

Transport tubes are connected to packing
tubes by a manifold at each screen joint. Slurry
flows down packing tubes or from transport to
packing tubes and exits through wear-resistant,
carbide nozzles to pack voids behind screens at
0.5 to 2 bbl/min [0.08 to 0.3 m3/min]. Blank pipe
above a screen assembly also can be fitted with
transport tubes to provide a path for slurry in
case of hole collapse or a gravel bridge at the top
of an interval.
Gravel-Placement Simulation
Computer tools are an integral part of designing
sand-control treatments that reduce remedial
workovers and completion failures. Simulating
gravel-packing processes allows sensitivity anal-
ysis to be performed using various gravel-packing
parameters (above). These simulator tools help
operators evaluate completion intervals, carrier
fluids, gravel sizes and concentrations, pump
rates, downhole fluid leakoff and returns at sur-
face. Simulations also are used to optimize
washpipe, screen and service tool configura-
tions.19 For example, SandCADE software
includes six modules—gravel-placement simula-
tion for water and shunt packing, pump schedule
generator, frac-pack simulator, tubing movement
and packer hydraulics calculations, and torque
and drag analysis—that provide necessary infor-
mation to design, execute and evaluate water-
packing and shunt-packing treatments.
Gravel-placement calculations are based on
a pseudothree-dimensional wellbore simulator
Normalized radius
-0.5 -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
1.0 1.0
0.5 3 ppa 0.5 1 bbl/min
0 0
-0.5 -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7 12,392.0 12,835.7 13,279.4 13,723.0 14,166.7
Measured depth, ft Measured depth, ft
0% 0 to 20% 21 to 40% 41 to 60% 61 to 80% 81 to 99% 100%
Gravel-pack efficiency
> Gravel-placement simulation. The risk of gravel bridging increases as formation permeability and
interval length increase or reservoir fluid viscosity decreases. Factors that affect gravel packing such
as formation characteristics, fluid leakoff, screen configurations, completion hardware and treatment
parameters can be modeled using computer software. Pack efficiency decreases as formation permeability
increases (top left). Low-permeability filter cake or high skin—damage—result in less fluid leakoff to
formations and higher pack efficiency (top right). Carrier fluid tends to divert into the inner annulus as
space between washpipe and screens increases—the ratio of washpipe OD to screen ID ratios—resulting
in reduced pack efficiency (middle left). Although the difference can be great, it is not significant in this
example. Increasing carrier-fluid viscosity to reduce leakoff can improve gravel-transport characteristics
and pack efficiency (middle right). Early annular bridging may occur as gravel concentrations increase
(bottom left). Gravel-packing efficiency decreases as pump rates are reduced and fluid leakoff
increases (bottom right).
capable of modeling horizontal or vertical, cased- 18. Jones LG, Tibbles RJ, Myers L, Bryant D, Hardin J and
hole or openhole gravel packs. A model based on Hurst G: “Gravel Packing Horizontal Wellbores with
Leak-Off Using Shunts,” paper SPE 38640, presented at
similar concepts has been developed to simulate the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Alternate Path gravel packing with shunt tubes. San Antonio, Texas, USA, October 5-8, 1997.
Treatments can be designed with service tools in 19. Karlstad S, Sherlock-Willis T, Rajan S, Samsonsen B
and Monstad PA: “An Evaluation and Design Approach
squeeze or circulating mode. In circulating posi- to Gravel-Pack Treatments in the Gullfaks Field,” paper
tion, surface-valve, or choke, pressure and fluid- SPE 48978, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana,
return rate also can be modeled. The pump USA, September 27-30, 1998.
schedule module uses specific job requirements
and input such as pump rate, gravel concentration
and fracture parameters to generate gravel-pack-
ing treatments, reducing the number of iterations
needed to obtain satisfactory pump schedules.

Summer 2001 59
 In the past, frac packs, which often failed
because of premature gravel packoff, were
designed solely using hydraulic-fracturing simu-
lators that neglected completion hardware inside
wellbores—crossover ports in gravel-packing
packers, blank pipe, screens and washpipe.
Users now can specify tip-screenout designs and
simulate frac-packing treatments with a recently
developed coupled wellbore and fracture sim-
ulator.20 This modified simulator, based on a
pseudothree-dimensional hydraulic fracturing
simulator, calculates parameters like gravel dis-
tribution in fractures, fracture height and two-
dimensional fluid flow as boundary conditions for
a pseudothree-dimensional wellbore simulator.
Slurry flow is simulated along with well incli-
nation effects, gravel settling and bridging
around screens, and fluid flow through screens.
In addition, the enhanced fracture simulator sup-
ports tip-screenout designs in high-permeability
formations. Inducing gravel packoff in wellbores
by deliberately reducing pump rate or shifting
service tools to circulation at the end of treat-
ments also can be modeled.
Once a final pumping schedule is obtained, a
tubing-movement module calculates friction,
buckling, ballooning, piston and thermal effects,
and allows users to design seal assemblies in
packers that compensate for potential tubular
movement. Packer hydraulics calculations help
generate procedures to run gravel-pack packers
safely and avoid premature release. Torque and
drag analysis provides estimates to safely run
completion assemblies to total depth without
getting stuck or damaging components.
Water Packing in China
During May 2001, Schlumberger completed an
offshore oil well in China’s Bo Hai Bay where the
operator had drilled an 81⁄2-in. borehole for a pro-
posed gravel pack. No fluid losses were reported
while drilling a 634-m [2080-ft] horizontal section.
A series of SandCADE design simulations was run
to optimize openhole water-packing procedures
(below). Gravel-placement simulations indicated
that 31⁄2-in. tubing would minimize gravel settling
and improve pumping efficiency.
Pumping rates from 3 to 8 bbl/min [0.5 to
1.25 m3/min] were modeled to determine packing
efficiency. At both 7 and 8 bbl/min [1.1 and
1.25 m3/min] higher pressures and fluid leakoff
resulted in gravel bridging and pack efficiencies
of 58 and 88%, respectively. With no leakoff and
full returns to surface, pump rates of 3 to
6 bbl/min [0.95 m3/min] resulted in a 100% pack
efficiency, but 3 bbl/min was considered too low
because of potential gravel settling in low spots
along a horizontal well profile.
Water packing at 5 bbl/min [0.8 m3/min] was
selected as the highest rate with lowest risk of
bridging that resulted in a complete pack. The
next step was to determine allowable fluid loss
by varying skin or formation permeability along
the openhole from 5 mD and no losses to 350 mD
and about 2 bbl/min [0.3 m3/min] of fluid returns.
The alpha wave stalled when return rates fell
below 2 bbl/min, and returns of less than
3 bbl/min were considered unacceptable by the
operator because of possible increasing losses
from filter-cake erosion.
Torque and drag monitoring and simulation
while running and pulling drillpipe to displace
RDF with solids-free fluids helped the operator
establish friction factors in casing and open-
hole. These data were used in the SandCADE
torque and drag module to establish horizontal
limits for various workstrings. This analysis pre-
dicted possible buckling of 31⁄2-in. tubulars dur-
ing screen installation.
In spite of additional precautions, buckling
problems occurred as predicted while attempting
to run screens on 31⁄2-in. drillstring, so the screen
assembly was pulled and rerun on 5-in. drillpipe.
A water-packing procedure was performed after
switching back to a 31⁄2-in. workstring. To verify
circulation, fluids returns of 4.7 bbl/min
[0.75 m3/min] were established by pumping
filtered brine at 5 bbl/min before placing gravel
with 0.5-ppa slurry. Pumping for 11 hours at
5 bbl/min resulted in an estimated pack effi-
ciency of 158% based on 81⁄2-in. gauge hole
volume. A post-pack cleanup treatment was per-
formed to dissolve remaining filter cake.
20. Sherlock-Willis T, Romero J and Rajan S: “A Coupled
Wellbore-Hydraulic Fracture Simulator for Rigorous
Analysis of Frac-Pack Applications,” paper SPE 39477,
presented at the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA,
February 18-19, 1998.
21. Tibbles R, Blessen E, Qian X, Steven B, Pardo C, Hurst G,
Kubota R and Mysko P: “Design and Execution of
a 3000-ft Horizontal Gravel-Packed Completion (A
Kazakhstan Case History),” paper SPE 64410, presented
at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and
Exhibition, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, October
16-18, 2000.

Rate, Gravel Total pump Gravel-pack Dune Beta-wave Circulating Surface

bbl/min concentration, ppa time, min efficiency, % height, in. initiation, min pressure, psi pressure, psi

8 0.5 205 68 1.5 28 2625 2863

7 0.5 280 88 2.0 83 2000 2016
6 0.5 369 100 2.8 158 1465 1647
5 0.5 450 100 4.9 254 1020 1151
4 0.5 570 100 5.8 390 650 733
3 0.5 759 100 6.8 536 340 391

> Water-packing design. Prior to water packing a 634-m [2080-ft] horizontal well section in Bo Hai Bay,
China, a series of computer simulations was run to optimize the design. Pump rates were modeled
in 1-bbl/min [0.16-m3/min] increments from 3 to 8 bbl/min [0.5 to 1.25 m3/min] with a constant gravel
concentration of 0.5 ppa. At 7 bbl/min [1.1 m3/min] and above, gravel nodes form during alpha waves
because of high differential pressures between the openhole-screen annulus and screen-washpipe
annulus. The nodes develop further and gravel bridges form at the heel of the well as pressure
increases during the beta wave. Some bridging still occurs at 6 bbl/min. At 3 bbl/min, packing efficiency
is 100%, but alpha-wave height is about 80% of the annulus volume. Pumping at 5 bbl/min [0.8 m3/min]
results in a complete pack with an annular alpha-wave height of 55%.

60 Oilfield Review
Shunt Packing in Kazakhstan
Fit-for-purpose modifications and careful engi-
neering extend Alternate Path gravel packing to
extremely long horizontal, openhole sections. Water Shunt
< Comparison of water packing and shunt pack-
Operated by Texaco, North Buzachi field in west- packing packing ing. Texaco chose Alternate Path technology for
ern Kazakhstan near the Caspian Sea, is 300 km the NB4Z well in North Buzachi field, Kazakhstan,
Gravel volume with because completion time and fluid volume
[190 miles] north of Aktau, the nearest city. In 20% excess, lbm 102,000 102,000 requirements were significantly less than those
1999, Well NB4Z was one of the first horizontal Screen running time, hr 7 15 of water packing. It takes additional time to
wells drilled in this shallow unconsolidated sand- Washpipe running assemble and run shunt screens, but pumping
and pulling time, hr 8 0 time is reduced by 80% because gravel concen-
stone reservoir, which produces relatively
Gravel pumping time, hr 15 3
tration is much higher. Total completion time for
viscous oil. Gravel packing a proposed 3000-ft shunt packing is 30% less than water packing.
[914 m], 81⁄2-in. openhole section required an esti- Total completion time, hr 29 18 Shunt-packing fluid volumes are 10 to 20% of
Gravel concentration, ppa 0.5 6 water-packing requirements, in this case less
mated 85,000 lbm [38,560 kg] of gravel, so
Fluid volume, bbl 4857 405 than 10%, which is important in remote areas
Texaco evaluated both water-packing and shunt- with limited water supplies.
packing completion operations (right).21
The NB4Z horizontal section was much longer
than previous 1100-ft [335-m] shunt-screen com-
pletions, so screen designs and pumping sched-
ules were optimized to improve efficiency, reduce
installation time and allow higher pump rates. KAZAKHSTAN

The AllPAC design consisted of two large trans-

port tubes that branched off at each screen joint North Buzachi
to feed two packing tubes (right). This configura- field

C asp
tion decreased the number of shunt connections Aktau

ia n
by 50% and reduced potential fluid loss and

Se
UZBEKISTAN

a
slurry dehydration along the screens.
Gravel was pumped in circulating mode— Baku
AZERBAIJAN
annulus open—with no washpipe inside TURKMENISTAN
screens. When gravel arrived at the top screen,
the slurry dehydrated immediately as carrier fluid
leaked through the screen and an annular bridge
QUANTUM
formed at the top of the horizontal section. Slurry gravel-pack packer
diverted into the shunts and gravel packing con-
tinued. The treatment was pumped at 4 bbl/min
until wet gravel caused mixing problems, and
rate had to be reduced so the blender could keep
up. Surface treating pressure increased through-
out the job and was high enough to exceed frac-
AllPAC screens Oil-bearing layer
turing stress downhole. However, formation
breakdown did not occur because of friction in
the shunts.
Shunt technology was the key to successful
execution of this extremely long horizontal, open-
hole gravel pack in a remote area. Gravel packing Transport tube Nozzles Screens Shroud
without washpipe saved rig time, and a special
thread connection ensured proper shunt-tube
alignment. Of 100 screen joints, 97 lined up
93

exactly the first time. Screen makeup and running

speed were about six joints per hour. A complete
gravel pack was achieved, placing 33% more Packing tube
gravel than the theoretical annular volume.
> Alternate Path design for North Buzachi field in Kazakhstan (top insert). AllPAC screens for the Texaco
NB4Z well consisted of two large transport tubes that branched off at each joint of screen to feed two
packing tubes (bottom insert). This configuration decreased the number of shunt connections by 50%
and significantly reduced fluid loss and potential slurry dehydration along the 3000-ft openhole section.

Summer 2001 61
 Before cleanup
> Filter-cake cleanup. Small-scale laboratory tests evaluated filter cake that was formed on cores
by a reservoir drilling fluid with CaCO3, starch and polymer before cleanup (left) and after soaking in
hydrochloric acid [HCl] or a chelating agent solution (CAS) at 180°F [82°C]. There is a single dominant
conductive path after soaking with HCl (middle) and uniform filter-cake removal with CAS (right).
Initial production was just 34 B/D [5 m3/d] of
water and 1257 B/D [200 m3/d] of oil, three times
the production from a horizontal perforated-liner
completion in the field.
Choosing between water-packing and shunt-
packing methods requires operators to assess
logistics, risks and costs for each application.
Both techniques have been used successfully to
gravel pack long, horizontal openhole wells. The
success rate for completely packing long open-
holes by water packing is about 70%, while for
shunt packing, it is greater than 95%.22 Success
is related primarily to shale content and shale
reactivity with drilling and completion fluids,
length of reservoir section and formation perme-
ability. When gravel packing with Alternate Path
screens, filter cake can be removed during
gravel-packing operations because a sealed
wellbore is not required.
Filter-Cake Removal
Gravel-pack plugging during production is largely
a function of RDF filter-cake cleanup. Decisions
about filter-cake cleanup depend on screen type,
gravel size and well design—screen-only or
22. Bennett et al, reference 10.
23. Smejkal KD and Penberthy WL Jr: “Horizontal
Completions—1 Proper Drilling, Displacing Critical for
Open Hole Completions,” Oil & Gas Journal 95, no. 29
(July 21, 1997): 71-78.
Foxenberg WE and Lockett CD: “Displacement
Technology to Ensure a Clean Well Bore,” Petroleum
Engineer International 71, no. 10 (October 1998): 23-28.
Price-Smith C, Bennett C, Ali SA, Hodge RM, Burton RC
and Parlar M: “Open Hole Horizontal Well Cleanup in
Sand Control Completions: State of the Art in Field
Practice and Laboratory Development,” paper SPE
50673, presented at the SPE European Petroleum
Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, October
20-22, 1998.
62
After HCI soak
0.8 in.
2 cm
gravel-pack completion, production or injection
well. If cleanup is required, engineers must
decide which filter-cake components to remove.
Filter-cake cleanup techniques vary from flow-
back and production without cleanup to aggres-
sive displacement procedures and multiple-stage
chemical treatments placed with coiled tubing.23
Filter cake formed by RDF contains polymer,
bridging and weighting agents and fluid-loss
additives as well as drilled solids. Acids, alpha-
amylase enzymes or oxidizers remove fluid-loss
additives, usually starch or other polymers.
Bridging agents, typically sized calcium carbon-
ate or sodium chloride salt, are dissolved by
acids and unsaturated brines, respectively. When
drilled solids are absent, laboratory tests indicate
that the impact of filter cake on gravel-pack pro-
ductivity often is negligible.
Filter-cake removal, either by forming pin-
holes or by peeling off, is achievable through
flowback during production if a borehole is rela-
tively stable. Complete polymer break is not
necessary. Some reduction in gel strength usu-
ally is sufficient to induce flow at low pressure
differentials. However, flowback often can be
24. Hodge RM, Augustine BG, Burton RC, Sanders WW and
Atkinson DJ: “Evaluation and Selection of Drill-In Fluid
Candidates to Minimize Formation Damage,” SPE Drilling
and Completion 12, no. 3 (September 1997): 174-179.
Burton RC and Hodge RM: “The Impact of Formation
Damage and Completion Impairment on Horizontal Well
Productivity,” paper SPE 49097, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 27-30, 1998.
Price-Smith et al, reference 23.
25. Brady ME, Bradbury AJ, Sehgal G, Brand F, Ali SA,
Bennett CL, Gilchrist JM, Troncoso J, Price-Smith C,
Foxenberg WE and Parlar M: “Filtercake Cleanup in
Open-Hole Gravel-Packed Completions: A Necessity
or a Myth?” paper SPE 63232, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Texas, USA, October 1-4, 2000.
After chelating agent soak
problematic, especially for small gravel sizes,
prepacked or premium-mesh screens and low
drawdown pressures.
Filter cake containing drilled solids may
require high drawdown pressures—greater than
200 psi [1.38 MPa]—to initiate flow when filter
cake is trapped between gravel and formation. In
addition, retained permeability after flowback
can be extremely low—less than 1% of original
reservoir permeability.24 Test results and field
data suggest that most horizontal, openhole
gravel packs require some type of cleanup.25
Flowback without chemical cleanup is viable
in certain long, horizontal openhole completions,
but more production logging data are needed to
quantify its long-term impact on reservoir man-
agement. Premature water or gas breakthrough,
or coning, in areas where pinholes form or filter
cake peels off may make wells uneconomic
before all recoverable reserves are produced.
Nonuniform cleanup has similar risks.
Enzymes and oxidizers that attack only starch
and polymers or acids that dissolve CaCO3 bridg-
ing agents and break polymer gels clean up filter-
cake components. Because starch fractions in
26. Parlar M, Tibbles RJ, Chang FF, Fu D, Morris L, Davison M,
Vinod PS and Wierenga A: “Laboratory Development of
a Novel, Simultaneous Cake-Cleanup and Gravel-
Packing System for Long, Highly-Deviated or Horizontal
Open-Hole Completions,” paper SPE 50651, presented at
the SPE European Petroleum Conference, The Hague,
The Netherlands, October 20-22, 1998.
Brady ME, Ali SA, Price-Smith C, Sehgal G, Hill D and
Parlar M: “Near Wellbore Cleanup in Openhole
Horizontal Sand Control Completions: Laboratory
Experiments,” paper SPE 58785, presented at the SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage,
Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, February 23-24, 2000.
Stanley FO, Rae P and Troncoso JC: “Single-Step
Enzyme Treatment Enhances Production Capacity on
Horizontal Wells,” paper SPE/IADC 52818, presented at
the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, March 9-11, 1999.
Oilfield Review
 60

HCI CAS/enzyme CAS/enzyme/VES CAS

50

40

Leakoff volume, cm3

30

20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time, hr
> Reaction rate. Sudden increases in fluid leakoff during overbalanced laboratory soaks indicate
that filter-cake removal with chelating agent solutions (CAS) are an order of magnitude
slower than with HCl. Reaction rates for combined CAS and enzyme solutions are measured
in hours, allowing these systems to be placed across long horizontal, openhole sections
without creating thief zones and high fluid loss. Reaction rates are controlled by adding CAS,
enzyme or viscoelastic surfactant (VES). Additional VES for higher viscosity or more CAS
slows reaction rates; additional enzyme increases reaction rates.

RDF formulations are much larger than those of
the polymers, just removing starch from filter
cakes significantly reduces flow-initiation pres-
sure and permeability impairment. Enzymes or
oxidizers can be used late in the treatment during
slurry displacement to remove starch and poly-
mers, but leave bridging agents. Conventional
filter-cake-removal treatments in gravel-packed
completions typically include single-step oxidizer,
enzyme and acid treatments or two-step enzyme
and oxidizer soaks followed by acid.
Until recently, these treatments were per-
formed after gravel packing with coiled tubing
after running tubing, requiring a second round
trip. The MudSOLV service includes new systems
for filter-cake removal that combine a chelating-
agent solution (CAS) with an enzyme to attack
starch and CaCO3 simultaneously, but slowly for
more uniform wellbore cleanup during or after
gravel packing (previous page).26
Test results indicate that filter-cake
removal—the time at which a sharp increase in
fluid leakoff occurs during an overbalanced
soak—by a CAS is an order of magnitude slower
than with hydrochloric acid [HCl], and that
removal times can be controlled by adding more
enzyme or viscoelastic surfactant (VES) to problems that are encountered when strong acids
increase viscosity (above). This low reaction rate contact some crude oils as well as difficulties
allows a CAS and enzyme system to be placed in handling acids offshore. Another important con-
long horizontal wells without creating thief zones sideration is screen corrosion when chemical are
at initial contact points, a common occurrence allowed to soak over long time periods. Testing of
when HCl is used. metallic screen samples exposed to HCl and CAS
Solids invasion into formations during filter- indicates that corrosion rates for chelating agents
cake removal, an inherent risk in conventional are much lower than for HCl (below).
two-step treatments with enzyme or oxidizers fol- In the past, treatments to remove filter cake
lowed by acid, is minimized or eliminated by were performed after screens and gravel packs
balanced soaks with CAS solutions. This new were installed, regardless of gravel-placement
approach avoids many sludge and compatibility method. This approach involved pulling workstring
Corrosion rate, lbm/ft2
Screen
material 7.5% HCI with 1% CAS with 0.2%
inhibitor inhibitor
J-55 carbon steel 0.0110 0.0037
13-Chrome steel 0.0130 0.0001
316-L steel 0.0580 0.0007
Screen openings, µm
Before exposure 150 150
After exposure 250 150
> Corrosion rates. Screen openings did not change when exposed to CAS in
laboratory tests, but HCl increased the openings from 150 to 250 µm. This is
enough to adversely affect sand control and completion integrity when
soaking for extended time periods at high temperatures after gravel packing.

Summer 2001 63
 1

> Service tool for circulating or squeeze packs and post-pack cleanup. The MudSOLV tool is a recent development that allows circulation
down internal washpipes immediately after water-packing or shunt-packing operations—position 1: running in hole; position 2: drop small
ball; position 3: increase pressure to open crossover for gravel packing; position 4: drop larger ball; position 5: increase pressure to disable
crossover for gravel packing and enable new crossover for circulation. This modification allows chemicals to be placed across stand-alone
screens or gravel packs for subsequent soak, injection or circulation, eliminating the need for coiled tubing cleanup treatments. Displacing
screens with brine after using acids in carrier fluids to remove filter cake is another application.

tubing and washpipe—tripping out and tripping
in—to displace carrier fluid from screens and
spot chemicals that attack specific filter-
cake components.
This process is time-consuming and expen-
sive, especially when long soak periods are
required for enzymes or oxidizers to react with
starch and polymers in the filter cake. Inability to
circulate after gravel packing with conventional
downhole assemblies was the reason for this
practice. Also, if a low-permeability filter cake
was intact, pumping breaker solutions down
workstrings and directly into an openhole sec-
tion, or bullheading, could be difficult and result
in inefficient, nonuniform filter-cake removal.
27. Parlar et al, reference 26.
Brady et al, reference 26.
Parlar et al, reference 8.
28. Barrilleaux MF, Ratterman EE and Penberthy WL Jr:
“Gravel Pack Procedures for Productivity and
Longevity,” paper SPE 31089, presented at the SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage Control,
Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, February 14-15, 1996.
Penberthy et al, reference 14.
A simple, low-cost mechanical modification
provides a circulation path down the workstring
and washpipe, back across the annulus between
washpipe and screens and up to surface via the
annulus between workstring and casing.
The new MudSOLV service tool uses the wash-
pipe inside screens to spot slow-reacting breaker
solutions for filter-cake cleanup immediately after
gravel packing (above).27 Slow-reacting breakers
like oxidizers, enzymes or enzymes combined with
a CAS can be placed across horizontal sections
without significant loss of circulation for more
uniform filter-cake removal in much less time than
conventional coiled tubing cleanup treatments.
29. Becker TE and Gardiner HN: “Drill-In Fluid Filter Cake
Behavior During the Gravel-Packing of Horizontal
Intervals—A Laboratory Simulation,” paper SPE 50715,
presented at the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield
Chemistry, Houston, Texas, USA, February
16-19, 1999.
Johnson MH, Ashton JP and Nguyen H: “The Effects
of Erosion Velocity on Filter-Cake Stability During Gravel
Placement of Openhole Horizontal Gravel-Pack
Completions,” paper SPE 23773, presented at the SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage Control,
Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, February 26-27, 1992.
This approach eliminates the need for coiled
tubing and allows breaker solutions to soak
while wells are prepared for production, typically
one to two days to trip tubing in and out. Sand-
control screens are exposed to chemicals over a
long time period, and depending on metallurgy,
corrosion may result in loss of sand-control
integrity if corrosive fluids like HCl are allowed to
soak during these applications.
In principle, filter-cake cleanup with slow-
reacting breakers like enzymes is possible during
water-packing operations, but this increases
uncertainty about filter-cake integrity. Adding
slow-reacting breakers during predicted beta
waves mitigates this risk to some extent, but
30. Brady et al, reference 26.
31. Parlar et al, reference 26.
Parlar et al, reference 8.
32. Saldungaray PM, Troncoso JC and Santoso BT: “Simul-
taneous Gravel Packing and Filter Cake Removal in
Horizontal Wells Applying Shunt Tubes and Novel Carrier
and Breaker Fluid,” paper SPE 68205, presented at the
SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, March 17-20, 2001.

64 Oilfield Review
does not completely eliminate the risk of induc-
ing losses and premature bridging. It is possible
to remove filter cake while gravel packing, but
cleanup treatments usually have been performed
afterward for several reasons.
First, water packing relies on competent filter
cake to maintain critical slurry velocity for gravel
transport and prevent alpha waves from stalling
due to fluid loss to formations and slurry dehy-
dration. Therefore, filter-cake cleanup prior to
water packing is not a viable option.28 Second,
scouring and abrasion from gravel slurry in turbu-
lent flow above a critical rate could erode filter
cake and increase fluid leakoff.29 Tests indicate
that filter-cake dissolution times decrease signif-
icantly as filter-cake thickness is reduced, and
are considerably shorter than times required to
gravel pack extremely long horizontal sections.30
Finally, VES fluids gelled in solutions of enzymes,
a CAS, or both for shunt packing and removing
filter cake simultaneously were only recently
developed and applied in the field.31
Shunt packing is independent of external filter-
cake condition, which allows slow-reacting break-
ers to be combined with carrier fluids to gravel
pack and clean up filter cake in a single step.
Breakers can be selected to target specific filter-
cake components without affecting carrier-fluid
properties. Simultaneous cleanup and gravel pack-
ing with shunts ensure breaker contact throughout
the annulus and across an entire gravel pack.
Why drill long horizontal openhole sections
and then accept limited or nonuniform inflow?
Compared with conventional cleanup techniques,
simultaneous gravel packing and filter-cake
removal improves horizontal gravel-pack produc-
tivity and minimizes risk of water and gas break-
through, or coning (below). This approach
reduces costs by decreasing required fluid vol-
umes and eliminating separate cleanup treat-
ments with coiled tubing.
Single-Step Gravel Packing and Cleanup
In 1999, Repsol-YPF and Schlumberger analyzed
well construction practices and production data
for Widuri field in the Indonesian Java Sea near
southeast Sumatra.32 The objective was to opti-
mize completions in Talang Akar formation, an
unconsolidated fluvial deposit with medium-size
grains, high permeability and a tendency to pro-
duce sand. This field was developed with vertical
and high-angle wells until 1996, when the first
horizontal wells were drilled and completed with
stand-alone premium-mesh screens.
In 1997, water packing was first used to gravel
pack openhole sections using brine and low gravel
concentrations of 0.5 to 1 ppa [0.12 g/cm3].
Gravel-pack efficiency—gravel placed versus
estimated hole volume—in 15 water-packing
completions through the beginning of 1998 was
71%, but a number of jobs achieved 100%
efficiency. Since then, more than 60 horizontal

Conventional post-pack filter-cake Simultaneous gravel packing

cleanup treatment and filter-cake removal

Gas Gas

Oil Oil

First point of acid or breaker

Untreated filter cake
contact or high-permeability streak
Water Water

Gas and oil coning after Uniform inflow after

nonuniform filter-cake removal simultaneous treatment

Gas Gas
Oil Oil

Untreated filter cake

Water Water

> Simultaneous filter-cake cleanup. Pumping aggressive chemicals like HCl acid directly down tubing typically removes filter cake at the point of first
contact, causing preferential fluid loss at that location (top left). Localized filter-cake removal leaves much of the wellbore untreated with filter cake
intact. The resulting smaller inflow area may promote water and gas breakthrough, or coning (bottom left). Spotting breaker solutions across screens with
coiled tubing is more effective, but also requires additional fluid volumes and cost compared with placing gravel and removing filter cake in a single step.
A MudSOLV simultaneous gravel-packing and cleanup strategy using Alternate Path screens ensures that less aggressive, or slow-reacting, chemicals
contact filter cake around the annulus along the entire wellbore (top right). As a result, the cleanup process is more efficient, flow-initiation and production
drawdown pressures are reduced, and inflow across horizontal, openhole sections is more uniform (bottom right).

Summer 2001 65
wells have been drilled and completed by water ensures complete packs, it also may eliminate exposed coal and shale. The 651-ft [198-m] hori-
packing. However, some of these wells subse- the need for premium-mesh screens as a backup zontal section was drilled with CaCO3, starch and
quently produced sand and had electrical sub- sand-control measure. polymer RDF.
mersible pump failures. Production log data and The final formulation balanced CAS, enzyme Exposed shale and coal also were a reason to
images from a downhole camera suggested that and VES concentrations to provide enough vis- use shunt screens. Because shunt packing pro-
sanding might be eroding screens and damaging cosity for gravel transport, but not so high as to ceeds from heel to toe, coal and shale intervals
downhole pumps. cause slow diffusion through the filter cake. are exposed to carrier fluid only until adjacent
In 1998, Repsol-YPF engineers implemented a Using this fluid to remove filter cake formed on sands are packed. This contrasts with exposure
series of water-packing improvements. An RDF 1- to 2-darcy synthetic cores with the proposed throughout a water-packing process as the alpha
with low-permeability filter cake was used to RDF resulted in 92% retained permeability. wave progresses from heel to toe followed by a
minimize fluid leakoff. Filter-cake integrity was Simultaneous gravel packing and filter cake beta wave from toe to heel. In addition, shunt
confirmed by establishing circulation prior to cleanup was implemented on the Aida-10 well. tubes allow openhole annular bypass in case
gravel packing. After gravel was pumped, filter This well, characteristic of other Widuri field coal and shale layers collapse.
cake was removed by chemical treatments placed wells, was drilled to drain a 45-ft [14-m] sand Prior to pumping gravel in April 2000, circula-
with coiled tubing. By the end of 1999, these pro- with 2- to 5-darcy permeability, 29% porosity, tion tests at 8 bbl/min [1.3 m3/min]indicated total
cedures increased average gravel-pack efficiency 5% clay content and medium-size grains that losses with zero fluid returns to surface. For oper-
to 89%, with one instance of sand production. require 20/40 mesh gravel. The reservoir has ational simplicity and to achieve homogeneous
To further improve completions, Schlumberger high transmissibility and a strong waterdrive, density, slurry was batch mixed and pumped at
recommended simultaneous gravel packing and fil- which typically results in rapid water break- 6 bbl/min. Initially, there was almost no surface
ter-cake removal using a polymer- and solids-free through and more than 90% produced water. pressure, but after displacement began, treating
MudSOLV carrier fluid with a ClearPAC viscoelastic Once the target interval was penetrated, 95⁄8-in. pressure increased to 200 psi [0.14 MPa]—the
surfactant (VES) and AllPAC shunt screens (below). casing was set just above the productive zone first surface indication of gravel bridging and
This technique reduces rig, coiled tubing and fluid before drilling resumed. However, casing was flow diverting to the shunts. Pump rate was
costs by eliminating post-pack cleanup treat- inadvertently cemented 100 ft [30 m] above the reduced gradually as pressure continued to build.
ments. Because Alternate Path gravel packing target in the Aida-10 well, leaving 60 ft [18 m] of Pumping pressure reached 2300 psi [15.9 MPa]
and remained there for several minutes as slurry
flowed through the shunts and filled voids around
the screens.
Repsol-YPF evaluated this treatment based
Transport tube on packing efficiency and productivity index (PI)
Protective shroud Packing tube
using benchmarks from 10 wells completed in
the same reservoir during 1999. These wells had
a 93% packing efficiency and a PI of 97 bbl/psi-D
Nozzle [2.2 m3/kPa-d]. The 20,700 lbm [9390 kg] placed
gravel exceeded theoretical annular volume by
12%. Based on excess gravel and surface pres-
sure response, the completion team concluded
that the openhole was packed completely. The
well produced more than 13,000 B/D [2070 m3/d]
total fluid with 40 to 60% water and no sand
after installing an electrical submersible pump.
The Aida-10 PI was more than 409 B/psi-D
[9.4 m3/kPa-d], substantially higher than previous
water-pack completions in the field. A relatively
Screen Basepipe slow increase in water production compared with
previous well completions indicates a more uni-
form, lower pressure drawdown along the open-
hole section. To date, there has been no sand
> Widuri field AllPAC screens. The shunt-screen assembly consisted of production, and the objective of enhancing pro-
12-gauge wire-wrap screens on 41⁄2-in. basepipe with four shunt tubes and a ductivity has been met. These results indicate
7-in. shroud. Two shunts were used as transport tubes, and two with carbide that one-step shunt packing and cleanup is pos-
nozzles every 6 ft were used as packing tubes. Shunts were placed eccentri-
sible without compromising productivity and
cally along the screens to minimize overall diameter. The shroud protects
and centralizes screens in openhole to ensure that at least 0.8 in. [2 cm] of does not require a competent filter cake and cir-
gravel is placed inside the shroud on the low side of the annulus. culation to ensure gravel placement.

66 Oilfield Review
Design and Selection Methodology (CBR) software is now available to capture gravel-
Oil companies and service providers have estab- packing knowledge and experience, and identify
lished applications and technical limitations for applicable techniques for a given set of well con-
gravel-placement methods, downhole tools and ditions and parameters. The CBR software ratio-
fluid chemistry. However, because the number of nalizes the number of filter-cake removal options
potential solutions is large, selecting the best by eliminating alternatives based on established
options for gravel packing and filter-cake cleanup technical limitations and by ranking remaining
requires expertise and worldwide field experience options based on expert input, and laboratory and
from drilling, completion and stimulation fluids to field case-history databases (below).
completion engineering and rigsite operations. Engineers answer yes-or-no questions about
Experience gained during the past four years is individual cases, well parameters and conditions,
the basis for a rigorous approach for selecting fil- completion variables, downhole tools and filter-
ter-cake cleanup methods.33 Case-based reasoning cake cleanup techniques. The system uses these
Project data CBR solution finder
Applicable chemistry Applicable tools, placement
solutions and procedural solutions
Compatibility of
solutions
Combined solutions
Field case-history
database
Rank combined
solutions
MudSOLV
engineering toolkit
Laboratory
evaluation
Material
requirements MudSOLV
recommendation
Solutions
evaluations Economics
> Identifying and selecting cleanup techniques. A systematic MudSOLV
approach to filter-cake removal for horizontal, openhole completions uses
case-based reasoning (CBR) and productivity prediction software along
with simple Web-based calculators for volumetric and cost estimates. This
MudSOLV process is a query system with tables to compare scenarios with
the knowledge base, which has two separate case bases, one for applicable
fluid chemistry options and one for tools, gravel placement and procedural
options. A compatibility check resolves inherent incompatibilities between
combinations from these case bases and ranks them to provide the final output
recommendations. The CBR software relies on databases of field experience
and laboratory test results to continually update the knowledge base.
Summer 2001
answers to “reason a fit” between a particular
well and cases in the CBR knowledge base, pos-
ing additional questions as needed to further
refine the level of fit, or reduce the number of
applicable cleanup methods. Each answer
impacts the applicability of a case, eliminating
some from consideration, and promoting or
demoting others. In this way, well scenarios are
quickly matched to the smallest number of poten-
tial filter-cake removal options, and then those
cases can be ranked.
Because of the cost of filter-cake removal,
laboratory analysis often may be needed to
decide between flowback alone and various
chemical cleanup treatments. To avoid unneces-
sary testing, a laboratory database is searched
for existing data applicable to the top three solu-
tions. If sufficient data are not available, more
tests are conducted. Flow-initiation pressure and
retained permeability data are input in NODAL
analysis software or sophisticated reservoir sim-
ulators to predict production rates, evaluate
costs versus benefits and identify the most tech-
nically and economically sound solution for a
given pair of reservoir drilling fluids and comple-
tion fluids.34
33. Mason SD, Houwen OH, Freeman MA, Brady ME,
Foxenberg WE, Price-Smith CJ and Parlar M:
“e-Methodology for Selection of Wellbore Cleanup
Techniques in Open-Hole Horizontal Completions,” paper
SPE 68957, presented at the SPE European Formation
Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, May
21-22, 2001.
34. NODAL analysis couples the capability of a reservoir to
produce fluids into a wellbore with the capacity of tubu-
lars to conduct flow to surface. The technique name
reflects discrete locations—nodes—where independent
equations describe inflow and outflow by relating pres-
sure losses and fluid rates from outer reservoir bound-
aries across the completion face, up production tubing
and through surface facility piping to stock tanks. This
method allows calculation of rates that wells are capa-
ble of delivering and helps determine the effects of dam-
age, or skin, perforations, stimulations, wellhead or
separator pressure and tubular or choke sizes. Future
production also can be estimated based on anticipated
reservoir and well parameters.
67
 CBR queries Answer

Is it practical to condition RDF through shakers to prevent plugging or damage? Yes

Are prepacked or premium-mesh screens to be installed in the well? No
Is there a significant risk of damaging or prematurely setting the packer while running No
completion hardware in used RDF?
Can completion brine be formulated with sufficient density for well control? Yes
Is it likely that fluid circulation will be required to run hardware to total depth (TD)? No
After drilling with the intended RDF, has this completion hardware been run in this Yes
field with brine in the openhole, and with acceptable losses?
Is it likely that sufficient drag to impede running of completion hardware to TD will No
be encountered?
Will a clean, unused RDF pass through completion hardware without plugging? Yes
Can a viscous fluid be formulated that is compatible with the RDF filter cake? Yes
Can a viscous fluid be formulated that is compatible with formation fluids? Yes
Are there facilities to effectively shear and filter a viscous fluid? Yes
Can completion brine be formulated that is compatible with the RDF filter cake? Yes
Can completion brine be formulated that is compatible with formation fluids? Yes
Will there be a capability to spot fluids in the openhole interval after installing Yes
completion hardware?
Are there tools available that allow spotting, or circulating, cleanup treatment fluids Yes
after installing completion hardware?
Will the well be gravel packed? Yes
Will the gravel-packing carrier fluid be a nonaqueous oil or synthetic fluid? No
Will the well be gravel packed using a viscous fluid process? Yes
Will the openhole be underreamed? Yes
Will shunt-tube screens be used in the completion? Yes
Will the well be gravel-packed by water packing? No
Will this be an openhole, stand-alone screen or slotted-liner completion? No
Has the use of a clear, viscous displacement fluid been ruled out? No
Is the generic composition of the clear, viscous fluid, which might be used as the Yes
displacement fluid, known?
Has the use of completion brine as a displacement fluid been ruled out? No
Is the generic compostion of the completion brine, which might be used as the Yes
displacement fluid, known?

Output: potential solutions

Prior to running screens: Displace to 1) conditioned RDF or 2) unused RDF or 3) solids-free

viscous fluid or 4) completion brine.
Gravel placement and cleanup options: 1) simultaneous or 2) post-gravel-pack cleanup.

> Wellbore-displacement and gravel-placement queries and potential solutions from CBR software
output for well completions in the North Sea Harding field. Leaving conditioned RDF in the openhole
section was the most cost-effective option that neither plugs screens nor compromises hole stability.
Both gravel packing with simultaneous filter-cake removal and post-pack cleanup were identified as
filter-cake removal options for shunt packing with VES carrier fluid.

Gravel Packing North Sea Wells
Many wells operated by BP in the North Sea
Harding field require sand-control measures.
Parts of the reservoir consist of sand and
shale sequences with about 40% shale. Pay
intervals are clean, well-sorted, 3- to 4-darcy
unconsolidated sandstones with 250-µm D50, or
median grain size, and a D40/D90, or uniformity
coefficient, of 2. Shales are composed of highly
reactive clay, varying from a few meters to less
than a millimeter thick. Sieve analysis of com-
bined sands and shales indicates a high content
of poorly sorted fines.
Because of low net-to-gross pay and high
fines content, BP selected Alternate Path gravel
packing to ensure a complete gravel pack. To
facilitate gravel packing with shunt tubes, poly-
mer-free VES carrier fluid was specified for low-
damage and low-friction characteristics. The CBR

68 Oilfield Review
 CBR queries Answer

Is a divalent brine (Ca, Mg, Zn) needed, as a breaker fluid carrier to provide required No
equivalent fluid weight, or density?
Are the bridging agents or drill solids in the RDF primarily CaCO3? Yes
Are the bridging agents or drill solids in the RDF primarily sized salt? No
Are there likely to be low spots in the completion where breaker may accumulate and Yes
remain for periods longer than the onset of injection or production?
Is the formation mineralogy (zeolites, siderites, chlorites) sensitive to mineral acids? No
Is the formation fluid incompatible with HCI? No
Is there calcite (carbonates) in the formation that is incompatible with Formic acid at No
high concentration?
Does the operator prohibit use of HCI? Yes
Does the operator prohibit use of organic acids? Yes
Will the RDF contain a significant partially hydrolized polyacrylamide (PHPA) polymer ? No
Is the openhole interval sandstone with a carbonate-cementing material? No
Can surface facilities—separators and heaters—handle acids? No
Is the well to be an injector without any prior production stage? No
Is the formation sensitive to acid corrosion inhibitor? (If unknown, call an expert.) No
Is the RDF oil or synthetic-based fluid? No
Is the pH of the carrier fluid between 3 and 10? Yes
Is there starch in the RDF? Yes
Is there xanthan in the RDF? Yes
Is there scleroglucan in the RDF? No
Is the production dry gas with little or no oil condensate? No
Is the desired or required carrier brine compatible with VES? Yes
Have reservoir fluids demonstrated a tendency to form emulsions with VES? No
Is a post-gravel-packing circulation tool applicable for gravel-packing operations? No
Is the bottomhole temperature above 250°F [121°C]? No

Output: potential solutions

Applicable filter-cake cleanup chemistries: 1) none (backflow) or 2) enzyme or 3) Oxidizer or 4) CAS and
enzyme treatments
Procedure and chemistry combination for: Simultaneous gravel-packing and filter-cake removal with 1) VES and
enzyme or 2) VES, CAS and enzyme
Procedure and chemistry combination for: Post-gravel-pack filter-cake removal with 1) oxidizer or 2) VES and enzyme
or 3) VES, CAS and enzyme
Placement requirement: Coiled tubing

> Fluid-chemistry and filter-cake cleanup queries and potential solutions from CBR software output for
well completions in the North Sea Harding field. The chemistry case-base analysis step indicated single-
stage enzymes, single-stage oxidizers and combination CAS and enzymes as options. Incompatibility
with VES eliminated oxidizers for simultaneous gravel packing and filter-cake removal, leaving flowback
without cleanup, enzyme alone or combination CAS and enzyme as potential solutions.

methodology identified conditioned RDF, unused
RDF, solids-free viscous fluids and completion
brine as four potential displacement options prior
to running screens (previous page).
BP prohibits HCl and organic acids because of
potential low spots in horizontal wellbores where
stagnant fluid raises corrosion concerns.
Therefore, single-stage enzymes, single-stage
oxidizers and combination CAS and enzymes are
the only available chemical options (above). All
three chemistry cases are applicable for post-
pack treatments, but required coiled tubing
placement because a MudSOLV service tool was not
available to circulate immediately after gravel pack-
ing. Chemical costs were about the same for simul-
taneous and post-pack cleanup, so coiled tubing and
rig costs made simultaneous gravel packing and
filter-cake cleanup the most economical option.

Summer 2001 69
 Gravel Packing above Fracturing Pressure
Filter-cake cleanup Flow-initiation Retained
treatment pressure, psi permeability, % Fracturing is avoided during water packing to
maintain filter-cake integrity and minimize fluid
No cleanup 160 40
loss. However, injecting slurry above formation
Enzyme only 4 70
Enzyme and CAS 2 91
fracturing pressure shows promise for application
with Alternate Path screens. In addition to break-
ing through external and internal filter cake that is
2350
not removed by chemical treatments, potential
Ideal Enzyme/CAS Enzyme only No cleanup benefits include additional stimulation to improve
productivity or injectivity and reduced potential
2330
for plugging, especially for injection wells for
Flowing pressure, psi

which increased flow area extends well life.36

Unlike conventional fracturing and frac pack-
2310 ing, this process does not initiate and propagate
fractures with a pad of solids-free fluid or ramp
gravel concentrations to extend fractures.
Flow-conduit performance
2290 Instead, it requires only that fracture-initiation
pressure be exceeded while pumping and placing
gravel. This technique is a simple and cost-
2270 effective method without the complexity of tradi-
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10,000 tional frac packing and methods of generating
Oil rate, B/D multiple fractures.
> Flow-initiation pressure (FIP) and retained permeability for well completions in the North Gravel packing above fracturing pressure
Sea Harding field (top). NODAL analysis production estimates (bottom) were about the uses viscous fluids pumped in squeeze mode.
same for flowback alone (green) or with chemical filter-cake removal by an enzyme only
Slurry dehydration occurs once fracturing pres-
(purple) or CAS with an enzyme (blue) compared with ideal inflow (orange), indicating that
CAS might not be needed to remove bridging agents. Flowback without filter-cake cleanup sure is reached, and a small crack penetrates
yields a 160-psi [1.1 MPa] FIP, much greater than the 40-psi [275 kPa] drawdown limit set by filter cake and formation. High leakoff into
BP. Estimated drawdown was about 32 psi [220 kPa] without cleanup, so the incremental cost created fractures causes gravel to bridge off
of an enzyme treatment was justified to ensure that FIP was safely below the imposed limit.
quickly and pack the annulus across that section.
Slurry is diverted through a transport tube to
another section of openhole, thereby initiating
Three options remained after analysis: 16-gauge 400-µm openings to prevent screen multiple fractures along the wellbore (next page,
flowing the well and producing without filter- plugging. Mud engineers tested conditioned RDF bottom). If there is no isolation in washpipe and
cake cleanup, and simultaneous gravel packing on a sample screen in a modified fluid-loss cell to basepipe annulus, slurry can dehydrate between
and cleanup with either enzyme alone or ensure that no plugging occurred. screens and openhole, allowing carrier fluid to
CAS and enzyme in the carrier fluid. After screens were run to total depth, the leak off into previously fractured sections.
Laboratory testing provided flow-initiation pres- openhole section was displaced with filtered Some degree of annular isolation between
sures and retained permeabilities for these three NaCl brine, the top packer was set, and the ser- internal washpipe and screenbase pipe at
options, which were used in simulators to predict vice tool was shifted to circulating position. selected intervals prevents gravel slurry dehydra-
production rates (above). Production estimates Gravel was injected at 5 bbl/min in a VES carrier tion through the screens and fluid loss into sec-
were essentially the same regardless of chemical fluid with enzyme to dissolve filter-cake polymers tions that were already fractured and packed off.
treatment or flowback without cleanup, but some until gravel bridging occurred. When flow This downhole tool arrangement allows selective
filter-cake removal was warranted because diverted into the shunts, pump rate was reduced gravel packing of some intervals and fracturing of
inflow along the horizontal section might not be to 2 bbl/min. others. Using isolation devices, operators now can
uniform and could lead to water or gas coning A total of 180 bbl [28 m3] of slurry was gravel pack near the heel in circulating mode and
and reduced well life. injected in one hour, indicating a complete pack frac pack near the toe in squeeze mode if desired.
After setting a 75⁄8-in. liner in the first well based on gauge-hole estimates. Water packing A similar process, reinjection of cuttings from
to employ this procedure, about 300 ft [91 m] of with lower gravel concentrations would have drilling operations, generates multiple fractures
81⁄2-in. openhole was drilled at a 75° inclination required three and a half hours with questionable around injection points and demonstrates the fea-
with the same synthetic oil-base mud that was gravel-packing efficiency. BP conducted a series sibility of gravel packing above fracturing pres-
used in upper hole sections. This drilling fluid of pressure buildup tests after gravel packing. sure. Pumping gravel above fracturing pressure
was displaced with potassium and sodium- These indicated that mechanical skin improved has been successful in cased-hole completions in
formate RDF containing polymer, starch and from 5.5 to 2.7 over the first eight weeks of the North Sea, Gulf of Mexico and West Africa to
CaCO3, and the openhole section was under- production. Skin for openhole gravel packs in achieve post-pack skins similar to larger conven-
reamed from 81⁄2 to 10 in. [22 to 25 cm]. shaly reservoirs is typically about 8, so this well’s tional frac packs. In reservoirs with high bottom-
The RDF was filtered to 63 µm through a 7700 B/D [1224 m3/d] oil rate was 30% higher hole pressure, this technique eliminates the need
230-gauge mesh shaker before running a than the industry average.35 to weight up base fluids for well control. No fluid
shrouded 41⁄2-in., wire-wrap shunt screen with

70 Oilfield Review
 Packing tube Nozzle

RWAA (OHM-M)
0 1 Well B-1, 54° Inclination
SP (MV) RILD (OHM-M) PORZ (%)
-120 30 0.2 20 60 0
CAL (INCH) RILM (OHM-M) CNC (%)
8 18 0.2 20 60 0
GR (API)
MD (FT)
RFOC (OHM-M) AC (MICS/FT) Protective shroud Screen
0 150 0.2 20 160 60

XX800

Water
contact

> Placing gravel above fracturing pressure, Gulf of Mexico. Stone Energy Corporation selected simultaneous gravel packing
and filter-cake cleanup over stand-alone screens for their Gulf of Mexico B-1 well sidetrack to avoid screen plugging and
erosion when water breaks through. The operator did not want to frac pack near water (left), but decided to place gravel
above fracturing pressure in the 277-ft [84-m] horizontal, openhole section using AllPAC screens with one shunt to ensure
sandface conductivity (right). A ClearPAC and MudSOLV fluid with CAS and enzyme to gravel pack and dissolve starch and
CaCO3 simultaneously achieved an effective gravel pack and uniform inflow, minimizing water coning.

is circulated into the annulus when pumping

Intact
filter cake
Limited
fractures
(few inches)
Fractures
(few inches)
across entire
section
Wash-pipe seals
> Gravel packing above fracturing pressure. Two critical hardware elements
facilitate gravel placement above formation fracturing pressure. Shunt screens
with transport and packing tubes ensure that multiple fractures are initiated
along long horizontal, openhole sections (top). To prevent fluid leakoff into
previously fractured sections and promote multiple fractures, seals placed on
the internal washpipe to match polished-bore receptacles in the screens iso-
late the annulus between washpipe and screens over discrete intervals (bottom).
35. McKay G, Bennett CL and Gilchrist JM: “High Angle 37. Godwin K, Gadiyar B and Riordan H: “Simultaneous
OHGP’s in Sand/Shale Sequences: A Case History Using
a Formate Drill-In Fluid,” paper SPE 58731, presented at
the SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage
Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, February 23-24, 2000.
36. Parlar et al, reference 8.
Gravel pack
Screen
Polished-bore receptacle
Gravel Packing and Filtercake Cleanup with Shunt Tubes
in Open-Hole Completions: A Case History from the
Gulf of Mexico,” paper SPE 71672, prepared for presen-
tation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September
30-October 3, 2001.
gravel in squeeze mode, and any weight fluid,
even lightweight gelled oil or low-density brine
can be used.
Stone Energy Corporation drilled a new well-
bore from Well B-1 to develop up-dip reserves in
the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana, USA.37
Beginning in September 1993, the original B-1
wellbore produced from a down-dip location in
the target sands until February 2000, when gas
production ceased because of high water rates.
The target zone consists of two sands separated
by a thin shale. The upper sand is fine-grained
with an estimated permeability of 150 mD,
60% water saturation and 6 ft [1.8 m] of net pay.
The lower sand is clean with large grains,
1000-mD permeability, 10% water saturation and
16 ft of net gas pay on top of water. This side-
track placed a 277-ft [84-m] horizontal openhole
section in the lower sand body.
Because of potential sand production and
strong bottom waterdrive, Stone Energy wanted
a gravel-pack completion that minimized water
influx coning and maximized reserve recovery
without coiled tubing filter-cake removal or reme-
dial stimulation. Simultaneous gravel packing
and filter-cake cleanup using a MudSOLV and
ClearPAC VES carrier fluid with a CAS and
enzyme to dissolve starch and CaCO3 met these
objectives. A screen-only completion was elimi-
nated because of concerns about screen plugging
and erosion after water breakthrough. An AllPAC
screen assembly with one shunt reduced the risk
of incomplete packing, eliminated the need for
lost-circulation materials prior to gravel packing
and allowed wire-wrap screens to be used
instead of premium-mesh screens (above).

Summer 2001 71
 The completion team did not want to frac
pack near water, but decided to gravel pack
above fracture pressure to improve sandface con-
ductivity. Shunt packing does not rely on filter-
cake integrity, so gravel was placed with the
service tool in squeeze position to increase the
likelihood of fracturing at low rates.
The job was pumped at 5 bbl/min, below the
6-bbl/min capacity of a single shunt. After
40% of the slurry was pumped, surface pressure
increased to 3400 psi [23 MPa] when a gravel
bridge formed in the annulus. At this point in the
treatment, slurry diverted into the shunt, pump
pressure fell to 2000 psi [14 MPa] and packing
continued. After 75% of the gravel was placed,
the job was completed with the service tool in
circulating position to ensure a complete pack at
the top of the screens.
More than 150% of the gravel volume
required to fill the calculated annular space was
placed around screens and blank pipe. Initial gas
production was 15 MMscf/D [430,000 m3/d] with
no water. Post-completion filter-cake removal
was not needed. A formation permeability of
1000-mD with zero skin matched rates for
NODAL analysis with actual production, indicat-
ing close to 100% flow efficiency.
Five months after completion, the first water
production occurred and gas rates began to
decline as water production increased. After
14 months, the B-1 sidetrack was producing
sand-free, flowing 2.5 MMscf/D [72,000 m3/d]
gas with 2300 B/D [365 m3/d] water and recover-
ing 4 Tcf [143 million m3] of gas, most of the esti-
mated reserves. Uniform filter-cake cleanup
contributed to efficient drainage along the struc-
tural crest of this reservoir.
Emerging Sand-Control Techniques
Drillers often prefer synthetic oil-base reservoir
drilling fluid over water-base RDF for better
lubricity, higher penetration rates, improved hole
stability and superior shale stabilization, espe-
cially for high-angle or horizontal wells.38 In addi-
tion to extensive experience gravel packing with
water-base drilling and completion fluids, com-
pletion engineers prefer water-base RDF because
of concern about emulsions or sludge that form
with some oil-base systems and crude oils. Also,
synthetic oil-base carrier fluids that can control
well pressures while gravel packing were not
available until recently.
Water-base carrier-fluids require that opera-
tors switch from oil-base to water-base RDF in
reservoir sections or before gravel packing. In
openhole, this change is costly, involves displace-
ment procedures that sometimes are inefficient
72
Water-Base Filter Cake After Flowback
Gravel
Filter cake
Berea sandstone core
Synthetic Oil-Base Filter Cake After Flowback
Gravel
Dispersed filter cake
Berea sandstone core
> Comparison of water-base and oil-base filter-cake removal. In laboratory
evaluations, thin-section photographs of filter cake against artificial gravel
show significant differences after oxidizer cleanup treatment and flowback.
Water-base filter cake remains essentially intact (top). Retained permeability
is established through pinholes or channels. Oil-base filter cake typically is
thinner and easier to remove, and often does not require additional cleanup
treatments. The cleanup mechanism for oil-base filter cake is fundamentally
different than water-base filter cake; virtually all the filter cake is removed
from the core face and dispersed in gravel pore spaces or produced through
the gravel (bottom).
38. Gilchrist JM, Sutton LW Jr and Elliott FJ: “Advancing Carrier Fluid,” paper SPE 64978, presented at the SPE
Horizontal Well Sand Control Technology: An OHGP International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston,
Using Synthetic OBM,” paper SPE 48976, presented at Texas, USA, February 13-16, 2001.
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Ladva HKJ, Brady ME, Sehgal P, Kelkar S, Cerasi P,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 27-30, 1998. Daccord G, Foxenberg WE, Price-Smith C, Howard P and
Chambers MR, Hebert DB and Shuchart CE: “Successful Parlar M: “Use of Oil-Based Reservoir Drilling Fluids in
Application of Oil-Based Drilling Fluids in Subsea Open-Hole Horizontal Gravel-Packed Completions:
Horizontal, Gravel-Packed Wells in West Africa,” Damage Mechanisms and How to Avoid Them,” paper
paper SPE 58743, presented at the SPE International SPE 68959, presented at the SPE European Formation
Symposium on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, May
Louisiana, USA, February 23-24, 2000. 21-22, 2001.
39. Tiffin et al, reference 6. 41. Oil-external, or water-in-oil, emulsions contain an inter-
40. Price-Smith C, Parlar M, Kelkar S, Brady M, Hoxha B, nal phase of water or brine droplets dispersed in an oil
Tibbles RJ, Green T and Foxenberg B: “Laboratory or synthetic hydrocarbon external phase. Water-external,
Development of a Novel, Synthetic Oil-Based Reservoir or oil-in-water, emulsions contain an internal phase of
Drilling and Gravel-Pack Fluid System That Allows dispersed oil or synthetic-hydrocarbon droplets in a
Simultaneous Gravel Packing and Cake-Cleanup in water or brine external phase.
Open-Hole Completions,” paper SPE 64399, presented 42. Tiffin et al, reference 6.
at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and 43. Tiffin et al, reference 6.
Exhibition, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, October
16-18, 2000.
44. Sanford BD, Terry C, Bednarz MJ, Palmer C and
Mauldin DB: “Expandable Sand Screen Alternative to
Kelkar S, Parlar M, Price-Smith C, Hurst G, Brady M and Fracture-Packing Sand Control,” Offshore 61, no. 6
Morris L: “Development of an Oil-Based Gravel-Pack (June 2001): 78-81, 106.
Oilfield Review
 Compliant Expandable Screens in Openhole Expandable screens also provide a viable method
to control sanding in high-pressure, high-temper-
ature reservoirs at the time of initial completion.
Base pipe Running screens One concern is that a small annulus may
remain even after screen installation as a result
Filter media Expanded screens of washed-out and enlarged holes or inadequate
expansion. If this annulus is large enough and
Protective shroud exists over a long continuous interval, it could
reduce expandable screen effectiveness to that
of stand-alone screens. A screen design that
expands compliantly and conforms to the bore-
hole is desirable.
Another concern is effectiveness of filter-cake
> Top view of expandable screens in openhole. To reduce initial diameter, cleanup after screens are expanded. Testing to
overlapping layers of filter media are sandwiched between a slotted basepipe date, however, indicates that screens pressed
and a protective pipe shroud with drilled holes. After these screens are run, into filter cake do not inhibit cleanup and flow-
a mandrel is pushed through the assembly, expanding the basepipe slots, filter back as long as RDF solids are sized correctly and
media and holes in the outer shroud against the borehole wall to provide
sand-control integrity. Filter-media layers, or leaves, open up by sliding over fluids are properly conditioned.43 This concern
each other, and the outside diameter increases by almost 50%. also can be addressed by using slow-reacting filter-
cake-cleanup fluids once screens are installed.
Long-term performance of expandable screens
and requires complex fluid-management proce- Like simultaneous gravel packing and filter-cake as an effective sand-control method is under eval-
dures on drilling rigs. In many cases, upper hole removal for wells drilled with water-base RDF, uation. Both laboratory testing and field trials are
sections are drilled with oil-base RDF, but reser- this pH-sensitive chemistry eliminates a separate defining formation parameters and reservoir con-
voir sections are drilled with water-base RDF, cleanup step. ditions in which this technology is best applied.
again requiring displacement. Both water-base and oil-base carrier fluids Field experience with expandable screens is
Laboratory and field data indicate that pres- provide excellent filter-cake cleanup in wells limited, but the number of case histories is
sure differentials for oil-base filter-cake peeloff drilled with synthetic oil-base RDF as long as the increasing. Weatherford, currently the only sup-
and flowback are lower, cleanup is easier and rheology is suitable for gravel packing with shunt plier of this type of screen, reports installing about
retained permeabilities are higher than for screens, and the aqueous phase contains a 23,000 ft [7000 m] of expandable screens in about
water-base filter cake (previous page).39 However, pH-modifier and bridging-agent dissolver. 25 well applications through November 2000.44
liftoff pressures vary when gravel is small and Oil-external emulsions, preferably with the same By working together, operating companies
formation permeability changes along a well- base oil and brine type in the internal aqueous and service providers have made significant
bore. In heterogeneous reservoirs with signifi- phase as the synthetic oil-base RDF, are another advances in downhole tools, gravel-placement
cant permeability variation, flowback without carrier-fluid alternative. In this case, the internal methods and chemistry for drilling and comple-
cleanup can result in uneven production profiles phase of the carrier fluid contains a pH-modifier tion fluids during the past five years. As a result,
and premature water or gas breakthrough. As in and bridging-agent dissolver such as a CAS or acid. sand-control technology for openhole comple-
the case of water-base filter cake, combining Stand-alone screens, gravel packing and frac tions has improved considerably, from stand-
cleanup chemicals with carrier fluids rather than packing are not the only options to stabilize open- alone screens and openhole gravel packing to
relying on flowback alone further improves pro- holes. Expandable screens have a reduced diam- simultaneous filter-cake cleanup, expandable
ductivity, so it is desirable to have simultaneous eter that is expanded against the borehole wall screens and openhole frac packing.
gravel-packing and cake cleanup systems for oil- after running in openhole and appear to offer An improved understanding of the applica-
base RDF.40 some advantages (above).42 Rock-mechanics the- tions for various sand-control techniques based
However, bridging and weighting agents ory indicates that if screens exert force against on field performance is helping operators realize
in oil-base RDF filter cake are coated with an oil borehole walls, expandable screens can prevent optimal productivity, high reserve recovery per
phase containing oil-wetting surfactants to form sanding because greater compaction forces are well and reliable completions with minimal
oil-external emulsions.41 This makes CaCO3 required to initiate rock failure and sand produc- remedial intervention. However, major chal-
particles virtually inert to acids and difficult to tion at the formation-wellbore interface. lenges like increasing exploration and develop-
remove. A synthetic oil-base RDF that inverts to a These screens eliminate gravel packing, ment in deep water and more subsea
water-external emulsion and makes CaCO3 parti- reduce well-construction costs by allowing completions lie ahead. Integration of geology and
cles water-wet when exposed to a pH-modifying smaller holes to be drilled and provide larger petrophysics with reservoir, drilling, completion,
solution is now available to address this problem. inside diameters for enhanced intervention surface facility and production engineering disci-
With specific surfactants, oil-base RDF is for- capability, higher flow capacity and, possibly, plines is a key to current and future sanding pre-
mulated as an oil-external emulsion above a better zonal isolation than conventional comple- diction and sand-control success. —MET
certain pH and water-external emulsions below it. tions with an open or gravel-packed annulus.

Summer 2001 73

View publication stats