SPE/IADC-189385-MS

7- × 4 1/2-in. Monobore Completion System Capable of 15-ksi Treating

Pressures in Hydraulic Fracturing Applications for Deep Gas Wells

Ahmed M. AlGhuryafi, Raul A. Garrido Cruz, and Scott F. Ashby, Saudi Aramco; Ahmed Abuelnaga, Halliburton

Copyright 2018, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 29-31 January 2018.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction
by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors,
its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or
the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations
may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
The increasing need for completions to be capable of withstanding higher treating pressures, combined with
complex well geometries and cementing requirements, led to the development of a new 4 1/2-in. completion
system that includes liner systems to facilitate isolation objectives, and upper completion systems to create
a monobore conduit. This new monobore completion system is rated for 15,–KSI target surface treating
pressures.
Traditionally, cementing and isolation objectives have been achieved using liners and liner hangers
capable of deploying those liners and also isolating the target zone. To achieve a monobore completion
design, an integral tieback receptacle (TBR) is used to tie the liner back to surface. The integral TBRs
currently used are either too short to enable the necessary tubing movement stroke, or rated too low to
enable the required treating pressure.
A solution was developed integrating a lower polished bore receptacle (PBR) below the liner hanger
that is capable of withstanding the pressure requirements, and using a compression-set anchoring system to
anchor a seal assembly inside the PBR. To account for tubing movement and help reduce mechanical loading
on the tubing and upper completions components, a PBR is placed above the compression-set anchor.
This arrangement enables the liner hanger systems to be isolated from treating pressures, which helps
remediate limitations associated with traditional completion systems. Considering that the liner hanger is
isolated from tubing treating pressures and that the compression-set anchor does not isolate annular pressure,
the TBR on the liner hanger is pressure-balanced, no longer exceeding the pressure limit. Furthermore,
tubing-casing annulus (TCA) pressure that is normally applied during stimulation can now support the liner
hanger and lower tieback seals.

Introduction
The formations targeted for this completion system are sandstone reservoirs with approximately 8,000-psi
reservoir pressure. Proppant fracturing stimulation treatments are necessary for the reservoir to produce.
To date, the majority of wells have been drilled vertically using two to five designed fracturing stages. The
standard liner pipes used were 4 1/2 in., 13.5 lb/ft, 95 ksi MY and 7 in., 32 lb/ft, 95ksi MY grade. As a
2 SPE/IADC-189385-MS

result, the maximum designed fracturing pressure was typically restricted to 16,000 psi or lower based on a
seawater gradient pressure behind the liners outside the target reservoir. Typical completions did not isolate
the 7-in. liner; therefore, this was commonly a weak point. During early field development, this pressure
was sufficient for stimulation, but as the boundary of the field was extended, higher fracture gradients were
encountered and the formations were unable to be fractured and stimulated. Therefore, the solution needed
to be both monobore to isolate the intermediate liner and production casings and increase the available
bottom-hole pressure (BHP) to approximately 19,000 psi.
Initially, a system capable of holding 10-ksi differential pressure was considered sufficient. As wells
became deeper and the formations being drilled across were tighter, a solution that would enable the
operating company to fracture such formations was necessary. Expandable liner hangers, where the hanger
body expands against the parent casing to provide a gas-tight seal, use material with an 80-ksi minimum
yield, and the nonexpandable components of the hanger are composed of 125-ksi minimum yield low-alloy
steel. Because of limitations associated with 80-ksi minimum yield alloys, burst and collapse pressures are
inhibited. To overcome this issue, two solutions were explored.

• Constructing the liner hanger from a uniform body comprising 110- or 120-ksi minimum yield
material
• Preventing exposure of the liner hanger to fracture pressures

Because of technological limitations at the time the system was designed, there was not yet a system in
the market that would have a higher MY to withstand these high fracture pressures; therefore, other options
needed to be explored.
The solution was to attempt to isolate the liner hanger from the path of the fracturing fluids and pressures,
which could only be achieved by creating a conduit for the fluid path through the liner hanger while
maintaining the monobore concept. This was initially applied using a 9 5/8-in. system, thus skipping a liner
size (7-in. casing). A 7- × 9 5/8-in. liner hanger was installed, set, and cemented inside the 9 5/8-in. casing,
along with a lower PBR, and then crossed over to 4.5-in. liner. This lower PBR was of sufficient length to
enable seal movement inside it, thus compensating for the elongation and shrinkage of tubing throughout
the life of the well. As per the operator's requirement, an allowable stroke would need to be at least 25 ft in
length. An allowable stroke is defined as the stroke that the seals would travel inside the PBR before the top
seal exits the PBR. This basic fundamental design was used as the foundation for the new 4.5- × 7-in. system.

Design
Equipment Design
The system, as a whole, represents a new implementation of long-used legacy products, arranged in a unique
configuration, to expand the alternatives of the conventional completion designs previously used in these
fields.
Liner Hanger. The system uses the same liner hanger that was used during the previous 7 years, but with
a unique configuration (the addition of a lower PBR), which enables fracturing fluids to flow through the
inside of the conduit and maintain the hanger as nonflow wet, therefore preventing the exposure of the
hanger to extreme fracturing pressures
Compression-Set Anchor. The compression-set anchor is based on an existing permanent packer platform.
The element system was replaced with a spring mechanism to store sufficient setting force to maintain
the external slips in the "set" position, while at the same time transferring tension and compression to the
slips without failing. The hydraulic setting mechanism, inclusive of the piston, communication port, and
cylinder, was eliminated, and the hydraulic setting force was replaced with a purely mechanical means (set-
SPE/IADC-189385-MS 3

down weight). The shear sleeve that normally retains the setting piston in the "run" position was modified
to accommodate an antipreset bore-sensing collet that releases the setting sleeve once the collet is stabbed
into the recipient sealbore. The collet is designed to collapse when entering a compatible sealbore and
simultaneously resist releasing the setting sleeve if only loaded along a section of the circumference.
Seal Extension. The seal extension is a simple threaded-threaded tube designed to maintain the through
tubing inner diameter (ID) from the packer to the seals, maintain a burst of at least 15 ksi, and withstand
the combined compressive loads of differential pressures both acting to burst the extension and compress
it (resulting from the hydraulic area of the seals below).
The length of the seal assembly was engineered to place the tieback seal assembly in the lower PBR of
the expandable liner hanger when the packer is in the fully set position.
Seal Assembly. The bidirectional seal assembly below the seal extension was designed to mate with
the recipient sealbore positioned below the expandable liner hanger. The seal assembly consists of a seal
mandrel, and externally mounted premium seals, spacers, and wipers. The premium seals and spacer system,
as well as the wiper system, are based on proven legacy technology.
Mule Shoe Guide. The mule shoe guide was designed to mate just below the seal assembly mandrel, with
the following objectives: help retain the seals, spacers, and wipers on the sealbore; allow through tubing
access for produced and injected fluids, as well as intervention tools; and extend the production tubing ID
to as close as possible to the lower liner crossover transition.
Three different configurations (Fig. 1) were used to develop the latest 15-ksi monobore completion
design.

• Initial 10-ksi design, which was used before the 15-ksi requirement.

• Initial 15-ksi design, which required the hanger to be set inside the 9 5/8-in. casing, with the
extended lower PBR.
• Latest 15-ksi monobore completions design.
4 SPE/IADC-189385-MS

Figure 1—Configurations used to develop the new 15-ksi completion design.

Operation Design and Preparation

Every operation goes through several design phases. The 15-ksi completion was installed in wells where the
targeted formations were the same as a previous well in which 19,000-psi fracture pressure was necessary
to fracture the formation; otherwise, if the formation was newer, openhole logs were evaluated to determine
whether a 10- or 15-ksi completion was sufficient.
Fracture Design. During this planning stage, the completion type is chosen, whether it be multistage
fracturing (MSF) (openhole completion with openhole packers and fracturing sleeves) or cemented liners
with a plug-and-perf setup. In previous vertical wells, MSF was not considered optimal for the targeted
fracture initiation and geometry; therefore, plug-and-perf designs were used. As such, specific intervals and
layers of the formation could be targeted individually. Note that the gross pay can be as long as 800 ft in
these wells.
Fracturing treatment steps generally proceed using the following order:
SPE/IADC-189385-MS 5

1. Perform the main fracturing treatment.

2. Flow the well for cleanup and rate measurement.
3. Isolate the tested interval and perforate the second stage.
Fracturing Analysis Software. Once the fracturing design is considered and the average treatment pressure
calculated, a computer analysis is performed to help ensure the correct completions equipment is selected
and will be fit for purpose. During the computer design process (Fig. 2), all equipment limits are entered
into the software, along with the fracturing scenarios and outcomes. Results for the chosen completions
should be within the design limits of the equipment; otherwise, either the fracturing design or completion
equipment need to be amended.

Figure 2—Software analysis.

Torque and Drag Simulation. Torque and drag simulation software enables the operator to determine
whether issues will be encountered while running the lower completion to bottom. This is based on a well
deviation survey and the completions setup. The outcome also indicates the expected weights while running
in hole (RIH) or pulling out of hole (POOH), along with the expected torque if the string is to be rotated
while RIH.
Once the section is drilled and the actual well survey is input into the software, the operator should have
a clear indication of where to expect tight spots that would require either rotation to pass or more weight
applied (which could be achieved by adding more heavyweight drillpipe). It also helps with mechanically
activated tools to ensure whether sufficient weight can be transferred down the string.
The software output is as follows:

• Hookload graph (Fig. 3) showing the expected weight while RIH or POOH in reference to the
string's tension limit and helical buckling limit.
• Expected torque to rotate the string at different depths (Fig. 4).
6 SPE/IADC-189385-MS

Figure 3—Hookload graph.

Figure 4—Torque and drag.

Implementation
Completions Installation Procedures
The installation of this system can be divided into two trips/runs. The first trip is similar to a conventional
liner run, including RIH with a shoe track, making up liner joints to the liner hanger connected to the
liner hanger running tool, and connecting the running tool to the drillpipe to surface. A liner wiper plug is
connected to the end of the liner hanger running tool to allow for efficient wiping on the liner joints ID after
the cement operation. An expandable liner hanger was chosen for this application because of the benefits
it provides compared to a conventional liner hanger system. While RIH, the entire assembly can be rotated
and reciprocated to overcome tight spots in the well structure. Because the expandable hanger has almost
a uniform outer body outer diameter (OD), the equivalent circulating density (ECD) while pumping the
cement is minimized. Once on bottom, the string can be rotated and reciprocated while pumping out the
cement to achieve the best cement bond behind the liner.
SPE/IADC-189385-MS 7

In between the two trips, cleanout trips need to be conducted to clean the 4.5-in. liner ID of any cement,
scrape the 7-in. casing above the 4.5-in. top of liner depth, and perform a polish mill run to help reduce the
risk of a seal failure caused by cement sheath remains when the seals are stung into the lower PBR. Because
the liner hanger acts as a barrier in this completion configuration, the liner hanger sealing integrity needs
to be tested before running the upper completions. This is performed by running a retrievable packer in the
7-in. casing, which is set above the 4.5-in. liner hanger. Lighter fluid is then substituted in the string, and
the hanger is positive and negative tested.
The second trip consists of the following: a seal assembly for the lower PBR, a compression-set tubing
anchor, and an upper PBR to allow for tubing movements during the life of the well. This is run with the
upper production tubing to surface. Once the seal assembly is stung inside the lower PBR, a tubing test and
a backside test are conducted to help ensure the sealing integrity of the seals and PBR before anchoring
them in place. If the test is satisfactory, the anchor is set mechanically by applying weight down through
the tubing, and weight is transferred to deploy the slips and anchor the lower seals in place. Overpull on
the string helps ensure the anchor successfully sets. The upper seals are pinned inside the upper PBR using
shear pins, so once the tubing anchor sets, an overpull is applied while holding pressure in the tubing to
help act as an upward force and those pins are sheared. Once this occurs, space out is performed as per the
well requirement and the tubing hanger is installed.

Fracture Treatment Design

Table 1 shows the pumping schedule for the sample well referenced in this study. In total, 11 stages were
pumped. Table 2 summarizes the actual fracturing stages.

Table 1—Designed pumping schedule.

Stage Description Fluid System Clean Slurry Prop Prop Type Prop Mass Rate Stage Stage Time
No. Vol (gal) Vol (gal) Conc End (100 lbm) End (bbl/ (min)
(lbm/gal) min)
1 Pad 45-lbm 20,000 20,672 — — — 35.0 14.06
Fracturing fluid
2 0.5 lbm/gal 40-lbm 5,000 5,214 0.50 30/50-mesh 25.00 35.0 3.55
Fracturing fluid High-strength
proppant (HSP)
3 1 lbm/gal 40-lbm 6,000 6,347 1.00 30/50-mesh HSP 60.00 35.0 4.32
Fracturing fluid
4 2 lbm/gal 40-lbm 9,000 9,819 2.00 30/50-mesh HSP 180.00 35.0 6.68
Fracturing fluid
5 3 lbm/gal 40-lbm 10,000 11,241 3.00 30/50-mesh HSP 300.00 35.0 7.65
Fracturing fluid
6 3.5 lbm/gal 40-lbm 11,000 12,525 3.50 30/50-mesh HSP 385.00 35.0 8.52
Fracturing fluid
7 4 lbm/gal 40-lbm 10,000 11,572 4.00 30/50-mesh HSP 400.00 35.0 7.87
Fracturing fluid
8 4.5 lbm/gal 40-lbm 9,000 10,582 4.50 30/50-mesh HSP 405.00 35.0 7.20
Fracturing fluid
9 5 lbm/gal 40-lbm 5,000 5,972 5.00 30/50-mesh HSP 250.00 35.0 4.06
Fracturing fluid
10 Flush 40-lbm 8,616 8,700 0.00 — — 35.0 5.92
Fracturing fluid
11 Shut-in 20-lbm Linear gel 0 0 0.00 — — 0.0 0.00
Total — — 93,616 102,645 — — 2,005.00 — 69.83
8 SPE/IADC-189385-MS

Table 2—Actual stage summary.

Stage Pump Max Max Max Max Avg Treat Avg Avg Avg Clean Slurry Prop
No. Time Treat Slurry Prop Slurry Press Clean Slurry Slurry Vol (gal) Vol (gal) Mass
(min) Press Rate Conc Prop (psi) Rate Rate Prop (100 lbm)
(psi) (bbl/min) (lbm/gal) Conc (bbl/min) (bbl/min) Conc
(lbm/gal) (lbm/gal)
1 25.62 12,737 34.5 0.00 0.00 11,296 18.7 18.7 0.00 20,083 20,083 0.00
2 3.52 12,619 34.6 0.55 0.55 12,443 34.1 34.6 0.48 5,030 5,101 21.66
3 4.40 12,299 34.7 1.13 2.00 12,113 33.4 34.6 1.08 6,173 6,393 66.58
4 6.48 11,943 35.1 2.37 2.42 11,631 32.5 34.9 2.27 8,835 9,499 200.39
5 7.55 11,422 35.1 3.45 3.45 11,352 31.6 35.0 3.26 10,039 11,122 327.20
6 18.77 12,154 35.1 3.74 3.75 11,738 31.2 34.9 3.65 24,529 27,493 895.33
7 5.40 12,462 35.0 4.32 4.33 12,297 30.8 34.9 4.04 6,981 7,913 281.66
10 8.03 13,336 34.9 3.30 1.63 13,006 25.5 25.6 1.00 8,621 8,638 5.18
11 0.00 0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0 0 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — 90,291 96,243 1,798.01

Results
The following results were observed.

• The installation of the 15-ksi system and execution of the fracturing design resulted in a better-
than-expected outcome. The completion setup allowed for pressures greater than 15ksi, enabling
effective fracturing into the tight formations.
○
The ease of the lower completion installation contributed to the success of the 15-ksi system.
• Given the favorable results of the system and its overall success, more than 60 wells have been
successfully completed since inception, making it the preferred option for the operator.
Fig. 5 shows a sample fracturing operation performed before installing this completion. In comparison,
Fig. 6 shows a fracturing treatment executed with the new completion system, where the BHP reached 21-
ksi.

Figure 5—Sample fracturing operation performed before installing completion.

SPE/IADC-189385-MS 9

Figure 6—Fracturing treatment executed with the new completion system.

Conclusion
The introduction of the 4 1/2- × 7-in. 15-ksi system provides increased opportunities for completions
involving similar gas well types and formations. The system has been consistently field-proven, becoming
the preferred option for performing fracturing treatments in high pressures. Through collaboration and
teamwork, the operator and service supplier produced significant value for their respective organizations.
Although successful, limitations to the current 15-ksi system exist. As a result of technological
innovations to meet these challenges, a more robust 15-ksi system should be introduced in the near future.
This new setup will not require a lower PBR to isolate the liner hanger because all of the parts will be rated
to 15 ksi or higher. Given the history of positive results using the existing completion system, better results
are expected with these improvements.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to extend their appreciation to the following individuals within Saudi Aramco and
Halliburton who have contributed to the success of this work: Khalid Nawaz and Tushar Mukherjee, Saudi
Aramco, and Abood Abeidoh, Frank (Duke) Giusti, and Ahmad Kadura, Halliburton.