Acidizing

The Fundamentals

Damage Assessment

Workover & Completion Commonalities

Fluid

is put into the wellbore and/or formation of some sort are run into

Tubulars

the well

Fundamental Acid Techniques

Wellbore

clean-up (tubing/casing) Matrix acidizing (sandstone or carbonates) Acid fracturing (carbonates)

Types of Acid

Mineral
Hydrochloric - HCl Hydrochloric/Hydrofluoric - HCl/HF

Organic (slower reacting less corrosive)

Acetic Formic

Powdered (acid sticks)

Sulfamic Chloroacetic

Dissolving Capability
15% HCL 1.84 ppg 28% HCL 3.68 ppg 9:1 mix 7.5% HCL : Acetic 1.64 ppg 9:1 mix 15% HCL : Acetic 2.48 ppg 9:1 mix 28% HCL : Acetic 3.72 ppg 10% Acetic 0.71 ppg

Acid Reaction Rate

Basic Equation
2HCl + CaCO3 H2O + CO2 +CaCl2 Water Salt Gas
1000 1843 1040 6620 2050

Gals

lbs

gals

ft3

lbs

Controlling Factors
Pressure

Less than 500 psi

Temperature

Add 20, double reaction rate Subtract 20, half the reaction rate
Velocity

Accelerate the mass transfer Flow patterns radial, linear, cylindrical

Controlling Factors
Concentration

Stronger is faster (to a point)

Contact

area & volume ratio

Matrix = large surface area (30000:1)

20% limestone with 10 md Same limestone with a 0.001 natural fracture Same limestone with a 0.1 created fracture

Natural fracture (3000:1)

Fracture = smaller surface area (32:1)

Controlling Factors
Formation

composition Surface wetting Viscosity

Retarded Acids
Gelled

acid Mineral/organic mix Common ion

Basic Equation
2HCl + CaCO3 H2O + CO2 +CaCl2

Retarded Acids
Gelled

acid Mineral/organic mix Common ion Oil-wet barriers Emulsions High concentrations

Acid additives
Corrosion Inhibitors specify time and temperature Surface Active Agents anionic, cationic, nonionic, amphoteric

Anionic tend to water wet sand, emulsify oil in water, break water in oil emulsions, disperse clays Cationic tend to water wet carbonates, emulsify water in oil, break oil in water emulsions, flocculates clay Anionic and cationic surfactants mix like matter and anti-matter Nonionic tends to be the most popular surfactants

Acid Additives (cont)

Non-emulsifiers (acid and oil) Chemical retarders (carbonates only) Foamers

2 gpt < 75 F 3 gpt < 130 F 5 gpt < 200 F 7 gpt < 250 F 10 gpt < 300 F 13 gpt < 350 F

Acid Additives (cont)

Alcohol

(dry gas wells)

Methanol < 200 F Ethanol < 300 F

Mutual

solvents (need?) Anti-sludge agents (asphaltic crudes 5-20 gpt) Clay stabilizers

Acid Additives (cont)

Iron

sequestering agents

Iron in tubulars, scale and fomation minerals Most treatments minimum control of 1000 mpl requires 10-15 ppt sodium erythorbate Control severe iron concerns 5000 mpl
60

to 120 - 1% acetic + 50 ppt citric 120 to 180 - 2% acetic + 100 ppt citric or 50-65 ppt sodium erythorbate 180 plus 50-65 ppt sodium erythorbate

Acid Additives (cont)

Friction

reducers Gelling agents Fluid loss additives Diverting material

Rock salt Wax beads Oil soluble resins Benzoic acid flakes (story time)

Wellbore Clean-up

Clean-up
Mill scale Corrosion scale Pipe dope

Pickled tubing

The Pickle Job

Minimum volume of aromatic solvent 250 gallons Scale basis 0.1 lb/ft in 5 20# casing (or 0.003 of 5.0 sg magnetite mill scale)

400 gal/1000 5 100 gal/1000 2 7/8

The Pickle Job

15% HCl Minimum CI Aromatic solvent pre-flush No iron control

Catch return samples

Matrix Acidizing
Below

fracture gradient Wormholes

Size? Length? Number?

Wormholes
Fluid

loss rate determines length, inches to feet long Fluid loss additives Viscosity Not a function of reaction rate!
28%

HCl

Sandstone Matrix Acidizing

HCl

for mud damage removal

Carbonate FLA Dehydrate bentonite clay

HCl/HF

only!)

for stimulation (sandstone

Always at matrix rate Permeability dominates Shallow stimulation

HCl/HF Acidizing
Always

need HCl pre-flush HF reacts more quickly with clays than silica Dont use sodium, potassium or calcium salt waters for flush Feldspar means use half strength (13.5%:1.5%) Flush with ammonium chloride or HCl spacer

Acid Fracturing (Carbonates)

Factors

affecting penetration

Fluid loss Injection rate Fracture width

Factors

affecting conductivity

Heterogeneity Closure pressure Rock strength

Acid Fracturing Methods

Density

controlled Viscous fingering Foamed acid Overbalanced surge

Density Control

Density Control

Viscous Fingering Acid

Overbalanced Surging

Placement of unconventionally small volumes of acid in a fracture mode is not possible in a conventional mode.

k = 100 md

k = 10 md

k = 15 md

Overbalanced Surging

Placement of acid is possible with overbalanced surging even with large variances in permeability

k = 100 md

k = 10 md

k = 15 md

Carbonate Acidizing

Reasons for Carbonate Acidizing

Damaged

permeability Low permeability Low perforation efficiency

Matrix Treatment Design

1.

2.
3. 4.

5.

6.

Determine fracture gradient Calculate maximum BHTP Calculate maximum allowable STP Estimate injection rate - Darcy radial Determine acid volume 50-200 gal/ft Specify acid type, volume, rate and max pressure

Fracture Acidizing
Majority

of carbonate reservoir treatments are acid fracs Good conductivity is the key to successful stimulation Productivity increases of 2.5-13 fold

Factors Affecting Fracture Geometry

Injection rate Fluid viscosity Fluid volume injected Fluid loss

Rock properties Formation fluids Formation stresses Reaction rates

Rule of Thumb for Acid Volume

Fill the fracture with an acid volume of regular 15% HCl that is three times (3X) the fracture volume to be etched.

Treatment Design
Optimize

the treatment Fracturing calculations Rock composition Closed fracture acidizing (10-20%) Treatment review

General volumes
Acid

wash/soak 10-25 gals/ft Matrix acid 100-200 gals/ft Acid Fracture 400-600 gals/ft

Questions???

Pat H. Sanderson 1-13 #1

Stimulation Evaluation
A Look Back and Forward by Pat Handren

Prior Stimulation Model

Original perforations
16,760 16,830 85/15 split dolomite/limestone

Problems
No cooldown Reaction time ~2 min. Small radius of penetration (50100)

10,000 gals 15% HCl BHT - 277F

Positives
Reservoir has potential!

Pat H. Sanderson 1-13 #1

Condensate History Match

Relative Reaction Rates

80/20 Dolomite/ Limestone
BHT - 277F

15% HCL

20% HCL

1 min

2 min

BHT - 177 F

32 min

40 min

Keys to Successful Acidizing

Cool

down the reservoir Increase the fracture width Rate dependent on pressure Maximize penetration distance Closed fracture acidizing Overflush

Two Staged Acid Proposal

First stage
20,000 gals 30# gel 5,000 gals 30# borate x-linked 20,000 gals 20% HCL

Divert with 500 bioballs Second stage

Pump at 8-10 BPM, but use pressure to dictate maximum rate

15,000 gals 30# gel 5,000 gals 30# borate x-linked 15,000 gals 20% HCL

Reduce rate & over flush

Fracture Proposal
Remove

tubing from well. Fracture stimulate down casing @ 30 BPM using a 35# borate x-linked system and 224,000# 20/40 bauxite in 2-5ppg stages. Lubricate packer. Rerun tubing.

Stimulation Comparison

Acidizing.
No mechanical changes required. No potential for pressure related failures. Conductivity is not predictable. Lower cost.

Fracturing
Requires prep work Potential for early job termination (25%) Potential for pressure related failure (<5%?) Conductivity is predictable High cost/ scheduling

Cost Estimates
Acidizing

Book Price - $90,000 Discounted @ 40% - $54,000

Fracturing

Book Price - $375,000 Discounted @ 40% - $225,000 (4:1 cost ratio)

Production Results
Pat Sanderson 1-13 #1
History Match on Condensate
100000

50-60' acid frac Production Data 418' acid frac 469' prop frac Results 210' acid 80' acid

BOPM

10000

1000 0 0.5 1 1.5 Year 2 2.5 3 3.5

Summary of Job Results

Initial acid treatment created 50-60 of halflength Second treatment created 200-220 of half-length (~200 short of design length) and produced close to prediction for about 1.5 years. Over time the half-length has decreased due to closure or recalcification to a length of 50-60 and is back on trend with production prior to second acid job. Conclusions: Second acid job was a huge success!

Well could benefit from a third acid job!!