SPE 164491

Matrix Stimulation: An Effective One-Step Sandstone Acid System

Ahmed M. Gomaa, SPE, Jennifer Cutler, SPE, Qi Qu, SPE, Joel Boles, SPE, and Xiaolan Wang, SPE, Baker
Hughes
Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Production and Operations Symposium held in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, 2326 March 2013.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE 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 and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers, 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 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
copyright.


Abstract
Sandstone acid systems, which are composed of HCl and HF, are commonly used to remove the formation damage in
sandstone reservoirs. However, to perform any treatment using these acid systems, a preflush and/or a postflush of HCl
plain acid must be injected to eliminate CaF
2
precipitation and secondary precipitation. In this study, a new sandstone
acid formulation was developed that can be used as a one-step sandstone acid system (OSSA). This system eliminates
the requirement of preflush and postflush HCl acid stages, reduces the treatment complexity, reduces the HCl
requirements, and reduces the overall treatment/rig time.
A coreflood study was conducted using different sandstone cores at 180
o
F. In additional to quartz, the tested cores
had varying amounts of clay mineral, feldspar, and carbonate. Consequently, they can be used to judge the performance
of the new OSSA system.
Based on the experimental results, regular sandstone acid must be used with a preflush stage of HCl acid to maximize
its performance and eliminate CaF
2
/MgF
2
precipitation. The needs of the postflush stage must be confirmed as it can
cause damage for sandstone that has HCl sensitive clay mineral. All selected one-step sandstone acid formulations
(Acids A, B, C, and D) were able to successfully treat Bandera sandstone cores. For Bandera sandstone cores, increasing
HCl/HF ratio increased the permeability enhancement and reduced the injected acid volume. Using the same acid
volume and composition, a higher permeability enhancement was observed for the core that had less clay and carbonate
content. Based on HCl:HF ratio and sandstone composition, a minimum acid volume is required to achieve a
permeability enhancement. For the Bandera sandstone formation, only 8 PV of the OSSA system was required to achieve
26% permeability enhancement. However, for a Berea sandstone core that had less clay mineral, 4PV of OSSA system
increased the permeability by 86%. The feldspar amount in the composition of sandstone can significantly impact the
permeability enhancement of Acid C, while kaolinite amount has nearly no effect. A corrosion test was conducted at
180
o
F for 6 hr using a two pipe grades (Cr-13 and N-80). Two types of corrosion inhibitor were evaluated at different
concentrations. All tested formulas had a very low corrosion rate (less than 0.03 lb/ft
2
). For both corrosion inhibitor
types, corrosion rate was increased by reducing the HCl/HF ratio and/or inhibitor concentration.

Introduction
The goal of sandstone matrix acidizing is to dissolve damage, typically from the drilling, workover, or completion
processes, that is blocking or bridging pore throats in the formation matrix, thus ideally restoring the original reservoir
permeability. HF is the only common, inexpensive mineral acid able to dissolve siliceous minerals. Therefore, any
sandstone acid system contains HF in some form (Smith et al. 1965). Mud acid, which is composed of HCl and HF, is
commonly used to remove the formation damage in sandstone reservoirs. Three main steps are involved in conventional
sandstone matrix treatment: preflush, main acid stage, and postflush. In the main acid stage, mixtures of mud acid have
been extensively employed in the field (Smith and Hendrickson 1965; Williams 1997; Economides and Nolte 2010). In
mud acid, the role of hydrofluoric acid (HF) is to dissolve aluminosilicates and silica, while hydrochloric acid (HCl)
helps to keep reaction products soluble in spent acid.
Sandstone formations may contain varying amounts of quartz, clays (aluminosilicates such as kaolinite or illite),
alkaline aluminosilicates such as feldspars, zeolites, carbonates (calcite, dolomite, ankerite) and iron-based minerals
(hematite and pyrite). The kinetics of mud acid reactions with sandstone are heterogeneous, complex and difficult to
2 SPE 164491
predict. However, the overall reaction rate depends mainly on the nature of the surface reaction within the pore. Unlike
quartzitic fines, clays are unstable and easily protonated thus very reactive and therefore dissolved at a faster rate by HF
acids. Nevertheless, when reacted with HF acids under isolated condition, both clays and quartz have similar solubility
(Lullo and Rea 1996). Simon and Anderson (1990), Gdanski (1994), Gdanski (1996), Nasr-El-Din et al. (1998), and
Thomas et al. (2002) emphasized the importance of secondary and tertiary reactions, where a combination of
precipitation, matrix unconsolidation, HCl-sensitive clays, and high corrosion rates have resulted in variable success rate
of mud acid stimulation treatments or even worse in further formation damage. Crowe (1986) and Martin (2004) showed
that during sandstone acidizing treatments, the following main precipitation reactions occur that can lead to formation
damage:

1. Precipitation of sodium and potassium hexaflurosilicates.

2Na
+
+ H
2
SiF
6
Na
2
SiF
6
+ 2H
2
O (1)

To avoid this reaction, a preflush of ammonium chloride brine is used ahead of the HF-based acid stage to
displace the formation brine away from the wellbore area. In addition, sodium-based additives, especially iron
chelating agents) should not be used with HF-based acids.

2. Precipitation of calcium fluoride.

2H
+
+ 2F
-
+ CaCO
3
CaF
2
+ CO
2
+ H
2
O (2)

To avoid this precipitation reaction, a preflush of HCl or an organic acid is pumped ahead of the HF acid stage
to remove calcium-based minerals (calcite, dolomite and ankerite).

3. Precipitation of hydrated silica (SiO
2
.2H
2
O).

26HF + Al
2
Si
4
O
10
(OH)
2
4H
2
SiF
6
+ 2AlF(OH)
2
+ 8H
2
O (3)
H
2
SiF
6
+ 6Al
3
+
+ 2OH
-
6AlF
2
+ + SiO
2
.2H
2
O (4)

To avoid precipitation of hydrated silica, HCl or an organic acid is added to the HF acid stage (Walsh et al.
1982).

26HF + Al
2
Si
4
O
10
(OH)
2
+4HCl 4H
2
SiF
6
+ 2AlF
2
+
+12H
2
O + 4Cl
-
(5)

Equations 1 to 5 indicate that acidizing sandstone formations is complex because of the various chemical reactions
involved during the acidizing treatment. To overcome some of the potential problems associated with sandstone
acidizing, a one-step sandstone acid system (OSSA) was recently developed and will be introduced in this paper. The
new acid system will eliminate the need for preflush and postflush HCl acid stages, reduce the treatment complexity,
reduce the HCl requirements, and reduce the overall treatment/rig time. The objective of this paper is to evaluate this
new sandstone acid system and compare its stimulation efficacy to that of conventional multistep sandstone acid
systems. A coreflood study was conducted using different sandstone cores at 180F. In addition to quartz, the tested
cores had varying amounts of clay mineral, feldspar, and carbonate. Consequently, they can be used to judge the
performance of the OSSA system.

One-Step Sandstone Acid
Due to the variation in mineralogical composition of the formation being treated, there is always an inherent risk
involved in sandstone acidizing. In an effort to mitigate any problems, the new system includes several features:
1. The system contains a high higher ratio of HCl:HF than conventional sandstone acid systems, which reduces
the pH of the HF mixture to levels at which some unwanted reaction products have higher solubility.
2. It uses boric acid (H
3
BO
3
), ammonium bifluoride (NH
4
FHF) and HCl to generate fluoboric acid.
Ammonium bifluoride, an acidic salt of HF, reacts first with HCl to generate HF:

NH
4
FHF + HCl 2HF + NH
4
Cl (6)

Tetrafluoboric acid is formed as a reaction product of boric acid with HF:

H
3
BO
3
+ 3HF HBF
3
OH + 2H
2
O (quick reaction) (7)
SPE 164491 3
HBF
3
OH + HF HBF
4
+ H
2
O (slow reaction) (8)

Hydroxyfluoboric acid (HBF
3
OH) probably does not exist in aqueous solutions unless it is in
equilibrium with fluoboric acid (Wamser, 1948). The preceding slow reaction is of an order equal to
unity with respect to both HF and HBF
3
OH. Because of the equilibrium constant at any given time and
place the generates 0.1 wt% of free HF at ambient temperature, which increases with temperature to
0.2 wt% (weight) at 212F.
3. Organic acids maintain the system pH less than 2 to limit the precipitation of aluminum salts.
4. Retarded agents eliminate the fast reaction of HF and reduce precipitation (Ke and Qu 2010).
5. A combination of clay control chemicals improve permeability enhancement of the treated core.

Four fluid formulations were selected for testing as a one-step sandstone acid system. Selection was based on
HCl/HF concentration ratio as follows:
Acid A : is equivalent to 15 wt% HCl + 1.9 wt% HF
Acid B : is equivalent to 10 wt% HCl + 2.3 wt% HF
Acid C : is equivalent to 5 wt% HCl + 2.6 wt% HF
Acid D : is equivalent to 3 wt% HCl + 2.8 wt% HF

Experimental Studies
Materials
Hydrochloric acid titrated using a 1N sodium hydroxide solution to determine its concentration was found to be 37 wt%.
All acid and brine solutions were prepared using laboratory DI water that has a resistivity of 18.2 .cm at room
temperature. Ammonium chloride and ammonium bifluoride were found to have a purity of 99.5 wt% and 95 wt%,
respectively. HF acid was prepared using ammonium bifluoride and HCl based on the following equation, (Thomas et al.
2001).

HCl + NH
4
HF
2
NH
4
Cl + 2HF (9)

Corrosion inhibitors, clay control agents, iron control agents, and other additives were all oilfield chemicals and were
used without further purification. Core plugs were cut from Bandera sandstone, Berea sandstone, and formation blocks
with dimension of 1 in. (Diam.) 2 in. (length). The tested cores (Bandera sandstone, Berea sandstone, and formation
cores) contained varying amounts of quarts as well as clay mineral, feldspar, and carbonate.

Measurements
The coreflood system was designed to simulate matrix stimulation treatments as shown in Fig. 1. In each coreflood
experiment, the core was first loaded into a Hassler sleeve core holder at an overburden pressure of 2,000 psig and
temperatures up to 180F. A back pressure of 1,000 psi was applied. Differential pressure was monitored and digitally
recorded during the coreflood experiments. A Teledyne ISCO 260D precision syringe pump, which has maximum
allowable working pressure of 7500 psi, was used for fluid injection.

Core Preparation
The core was saturated under a vacuum condition with 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution for 5 hrs. The core pore volume was
calculated by dividing the difference between the saturated core and dry core weights by the NH
4
Cl solution density.
Before injecting the acid, the core was heated to the test temperature for at least 2 hrs to ensure stabilization of the core
and fluid temperatures. Injection rate of 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution during heating was 1 ml/min.

Injection Procedures
After temperature stabilization, 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution was injected at rate of 5 ml/min and core permeability measured,
then reduced to 2 ml/min for a second permeability measurement. The two measurements were then averaged to obtain a
single initial permeability figure. For all acid stage(s), injection rate was 2 ml/min. Finally, 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution was
injected again to measure core permeability at 2 and 5 ml/min, and these permeabilities were averaged to obtain a final
permeability figure.

Results and Discussions
Regular Sandstone Acid
Coreflood experiments #1-4 were conducted to investigate the effect of using preflush and postflush stage of HCl acid
when using the regular sandstone acid. In these experiments, Bandera sandstone cores were used. The Bandera sandstone
4 SPE 164491
contained quartz as well as varying amounts of clay mineral, feldspar, and carbonate (Dolomite), as shown as shown in
Table 1. Therefore, it can be considered a good candidate rock to judge the performance of the sandstone acid formula.
Coreflood #1, Bandera sandstone, Fig. 2: After injecting 5 wt% NH
4
Cl to measure the initial permeability, 4 PV of 10
wt% HCl acid were injected as preflush stage, followed by 8 PV of regular sandstone acid, and finally 4 PV of 10 wt%
HCl acid as postflush stage. While injecting the first 2 PV (Fig. 2) of the preflush acid stage, the pressure drop increased
from 10 to 50 psi and then decreased to 24 psi while injecting the remaining 2 PV of the stage. These results indicated
that HCl acid injection in sandstone formation caused damage and stimulation at the same time. At tested conditions, the
initial damaging mechanism of HCl dominated until 2 PV had been injected, whereupon stimulation and damaging
mechanisms were equal. After that, the stimulation mechanism dominated. However, the overall effect was damage:
After 4 PV of HCl injection, the pressure drop had increased from 10 to 24 psi.
As shown in Table 1, Bandera cores contain significant amounts of illite, kaolinite, chlorite and dolomite. It is well
known in the literature that flowing HCl in cores containing carbonate will increase core permeability (Economides et al.
1993). However, flowing HCl in cores containing clay minerals increases the pressure drop due to the clay reaction
product migration, precipitation of reaction product and/or increase in the viscosity. Illite and chlorite are attacked by
HCl to produce significant amount of amorphous silica gel residue (Thomas et al. 2001). Chlorite was found to be the
most susceptible to acid attack. The illite structure seems to be less subject to attack; because it is bonded together by K
+

ions, there is no interlayer space (Simon and Anderson 1990). Bryant and Buller (1990) noticed that amorphous silica
(hydrated silica) and mineral fragments migrated when HCl acid was used in sandstone acidizing. Aluminum is
preferentially leached when dissolving kaolinite in HCl. The structure of kaolinite is layered (made up of sheets) in
which acid attacks preferentially at the edge. In turn, this may cause fines migration and formation damage (Hartman et
al. 2006). Magnesium and aluminum could have been leached from the crystalline lattice during dissolution in 15 wt%
HCl, thereby changing the clay structure (Kline and Fogler 1981). At the same time, flowing HCl in cores containing
carbonate reduced the pressure drop due to high solubility of carbonate in HCl acid (Economides et al. 1993).
After the preflush stage of HCl, 8 PV of the main acid stage (regular sandstone acid with 3 wt% HF acid) was
injected. The pressure drop decreased from 24 to 8 psi after injecting 5 PV of the regular sandstone acid. However,
during the injection of the remaining 3 PV, the pressure drop slowly increased from 8 to 9 psi. This may be evidence of
precipitation during the injection of regular sandstone acid. Overall, the regular sandstone acid stage was able to remove
the damage caused by the HCl and enhance the permeability of the core. In the final postflush acid stage of HCl, the
pressure drop increased slowly from 9 to 11 psi. Even after treating the sandstone core with HF acid, the postflush stage
of HCl will damage the core if contains HCl-sensitive clay, as in the Bandera formation. Flow of 5 wt% NH
4
Cl was
injected to measure the final permeability. At the end of the experiment, 28% permeability enhancement was calculated
using Equation 10:

Peimeability Enhancment oi ieuuction, % =
K
I
-K

1uu (10)
Where K
i
is the initial core permeability in md, and K
f
is the final core permeability in md.

Coreflood #2, Bandera sandstone, Fig. 3: For this test, the regular sandstone acid was evaluated without injecting a
preflush or postflush stage of HCl acid. Initially 5 wt% NH
4
Cl was injected at rate of 5 ml/min, then reduced to 2 ml/min
to determine the initial permeability. The acid injection rate was then kept constant at 2 ml/min until the end of the
experiment. As the regular sandstone acid entered the core, the pressure drop continuously increased from 10 to 40 psi.
This is an indication of damage inside the core, and in fact the final measured permeability reflected a 67.5 permeability
reduction. It is most probably due to CaF
2
and MgF
2
precipitation because the Bandera cores contained 5 wt% dolomite.
Secondary and tertiary precipitation also likely came from clay minerals.
Table 2 shows the summary of the four experiments to show the effect of adding preflush and postflush of HCl. The
highest permeability enhancement was obtained when only a preflush stage of HCl was used (Experiment #3: Table 2)
followed by the case where both preflush and postflush stages were used (Experiment #1: Table 2). As discussed earlier,
the Bandera cores contained HCl-sensitive clay; therefore, the HCl postflush stage damaged the core. The need for a
postflush stage must be confirmed before use because it can damage the permeability of sandstone that has HCl-sensitive
clay mineral (illite, chlorite, and kaolinite). However, in the cases without the preflush stage of HCl, it became apparent
that a postflush of HCl was important to reduce the damage from the HF acid: See Table 2, experiments #2 and 4, where
the permeability reduction was reduced from 67.5 to 53.3. Ultimately, however, regular sandstone acid should be used
with a preflush stage of HCl acid to maximize its performance and minimize any CaF
2
/MgF
2
precipitation and damage.

One-Step Sandstone Acid
As discussed earlier, four different fluid formulas (Acids A, B, C, and D) were selected to be tested as one-step
sandstone acid systems without any preflush or postflush stages of HCl acid. The main difference among the four
formulations is the HCl:HF ratio:
Acid A is equivalent to 15 wt% HCl + 1.9 wt% HF
SPE 164491 5
Acid B is equivalent to 10 wt% HCl + 2.3 wt% HF
Acid C is equivalent to 5 wt% HCl + 2.6 wt% HF
Acid D is equivalent to 3 wt% HCl + 2.8 wt% HF

Coreflood #5, Bandera sandstone, Fig. 4: The 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution was injected at 5 ml/min then reduced to 2
ml/min to determine the initial core permeability. Acid A was injected inside core #5 at rate of 2 ml/min. As expected
because of the high HCl concentration of Acid A, the pressure drop increased from nearly 12 to 154 psi within the first 2
PV of Acid A injection. After that, the pressure drop decreased rapidly for the next 2 PV to 40 psi. The decrease in the
pressure drop slowed upon reaching 12 psi (initial pressure drop), after total injection of 12 PV. At the end of the
experiment, 113% permeability enhancement was calculated.
Coreflood #6, Bandera sandstone, Fig. 5: The 5 wt% NH
4
Cl solution was injected at 5 ml/min then reduced to 2
ml/min to determine the initial core permeability. Acid B was injected inside core #6 at rate of 2 ml/min. The pressure
drop increased from nearly 12 to 120 psi within the first 3 PV of Acid B injection. After that, the pressure drop decreased
rapidly for the next 3 PV to 38 psi. The decrease in the pressure drop slowed upon reaching 12 psi (initial pressure drop)
,after total injection of 15 PV. At the end of the experiment, 104% permeability enhancement was calculated.
Corefloods #7-8, Bandera sandstone, Figs. 6 and 7: Acids C and D produced the same ressure drop performance as
Acid A and B. The pressure drop while injecting Acid C initially increased to 108 psi within the first 3 PV; after about
16 PV of Acid C, 86% permeability enhancement was calculated. For Acid D, the initial pressure drop increased to 75
psi while injecting the first 4 PV, and it took 18 PV to achieve 54% of permeability enhancement.
From Figs. 4-7, it is clear that all selected acid formulations (Acids A, B, C, and D) can successfully stimulate
Bandera sandstone cores. However, each formulation shows a different pressure drop performance with different final
permeability enhancement. Table 3 summarizes the results of Corefloods #5-8 (Figs. 4-7). Acid A gives the maximum
observed pressure drop, followed by B, C and D, in that order. Also, Acid A gives the highest permeability enhancement
with the lowest acid volume, followed by B, C and D, in that order. Because of the additional additives that control the
release and the reaction of HF and the high HCl:HF ratio, Acid A behaves similarly to HCl acid. This can be
demonstrated clearly by comparing the pressure drop curves while injecting the HCl preflush stage and while injecting
Acid A (Figs. 2 and 5), where the pressure drop increased significantly with 2 PV of injection. Therefore, as the HCl:HF
ratio decreased (changing from Acids A to D), the maximum observed pressure drop decreased.
The Bandera sandstone contains HCl-sensitive clay mineral (illite, chlorite, and kaolinite). Therefore, when Acid A
entered the core, the pressure drop significantly increased due to damage from reacting HCl with illite, chlorite, and
kaolinite. Overall, this type of damage is not permanent or significant, at least for the Bandera sandstone or sandstones
with similar compositions. The HCl content in Acid D is smaller, and so HCl-induced damage is lower. This is why the
lowest maximum pressure drop is observed for Acid D. However, HF-induced damage is higher in Acid D than in Acid
A. This type of damage develops slowly, as shown in Fig. 3 (when only regular acid is used) and is difficult to remove.
Table 3 demonstrates this: A larger volume of Acid D is required to achieve positive permeability enhancement,
compared with the other one-step acid systems. Based on these results, the one-step sandstone acid formulations that
have high HCl:HF ratio (like Acids A and B) are recommended for formations with high carbonate content and low HCl-
sensitive clay content. Conversely, one-step sandstone acid formulations with lower HCl:HF ratio (like Acids C and D)
are recommended for sandstone formations with low carbonate content and more HCl-sensitive clay. However for the
cores that has both high carbonate content and low HCl-sensitive clay content, Acids B & C should be tested.

Effect of Acid Pore Volume
In these experiment different volumes of Acid C was injected in different Bandera sandstone cores to study the effect of
injected acid volume on the final permeability enhancement. Results of these experiments were shown in Table 4. The
final core permeability was increased by increasing the injected acid volume. However, it is important to highlight that
there is a minimum acid volume need to achieve a final permeability greater than initial value (Coreflood #9-10). This
minimum depends on the HCl:HF ratio of the acid system and the composition of sandstone formation. For the Bandera
sandstone, at least 8PV of Acid C were required to achieve permeability enhancement.

Effect of Sandstone Composition
Sandstone is composed of small grains that are cemented by siliceous, felspathic or calcareous cementing material. The
cementing material determines the durability of the sandstone. Berea sandstone core, which has less clay mineral than
Bandera, will have different response when treated by the new one-step sandstone acid. Therefore, 4 PV of Acid C was
injected inside a Berea sandstone core. Table 5 shows the differences in compositions between Bandera and Berea
sandstone core. A significant different in permeability enhancement was observed: a 33% permeability reduction in the
Bandera compared with 86% permeability enhancement in the Berea. It was clear that a higher permeability
enhancement will be obtained for the core that has less clay and carbonate content.
6 SPE 164491
In the next experiments, 8 PV of Acid C were injected into cores obtained from three different sandstone formations
(FM #1, FM #2, and FM #3). Table 6 shows the compositions of the three cores and compares the permeability
enhancement of these cores after injection of 8 PV of Acid C with Bandera sandstone core. Core from FM #1 has slightly
higher quartz content than Bandera sandstone. Also, it has less clay and carbonate content. However, the main difference
is the higher feldspar content. Comparing the permeability enhancement obtained from Bandera and FM 1, it can be
concluded that increased feldspar content significantly reduces the permeability enhancement capability of the new one-
step sandstone acid. A larger volume of the new one-step sandstone acid will be required for sandstone formations with
high feldspar content.
Core from FM #2 has higher quartz content than Bandera sandstone. This core can be considered clean core at 92%
quartz. Therefore, the permeability enhancement of this core was significantly higher than for the Bandera. Core from
from FM #3 also had more quartz than the Bandera, but slightly less than FM #2. In addition, there is slightly less
siderite (3 vs. 2 wt%) and more kaolinite (4 vs. 10 wt%). Permeability enhancement in both cores (FM #2 and FM #3) is
nearly the same. This suggests that kaolinite (a clay mineral) has a minimal effect on achievable permeability
enhancement.

Fractured Sandstone Formation
8 PV of Acid C was injected into two fractured cores: the first has the fracture direction in the direction of acid injection
(parallel direction) and the second has the fracture direction perpendicular to direction of acid injection, Fig. 8. For the
first core, although the tested core composition has a significant amount of illite clay which can cause damage during
sandstone acid injection, a 330% permeability enhancement was calculated, Table 7. Because the acid flows in same
direction as the fracture, acid will react with the fracture face and cause an etching profile that significantly enhances the
permeability of the fracture. In the second core, which with 94% quartz composition should be considered clean, the
same acid volume produced a 165% permeability enhancement. As the acid flow is perpendicular to the fracture, acid
reaction on the fracture face will not significantly enhance the overall core permeability as it does in the case of a parallel
fracture.

Corrosion Test
Table 8 shows the summary of corrosion test result for Acids A, B and C at 180F for 6 hrs using a two pipe grades (Cr-
13 and N-80). Two corrosion inhibitors (CI-A and CI-B) were evaluated at different concentrations. CI-A is preferred to
for Cr-13 pipe grades, and CI-B is preferred for N-80. All results shows low corrosion rate for all tested acids less than
0.03 lb/ft
2
for the three tested acid systems (Acids A, B and C). For both corrosion inhibitor types, increasing the
inhibitor concentration reduced the corrosion rate as it is shown in Test #1-3, Table 8. For both corrosion inhibitors, the
corrosion rate increased as the HCl:HF ratio decreased (Tests #1, 7, and 13). At the same conditions, Acid A has a lower
corrosion rate than Acid B, which has lower corrosion rate than Acid C. Also, only in Acid A, the corrosion rate in Cr-13
pipe grade is less than in N-80 regardless of the inhibitor used (Tests #3 and4, 1 and 5 or 2 and 6). For Acids B and C,
the corrosion rate in Cr-13 pipe grade is higher than in N-80.

Conclusions
This study introduces a new sandstone acid system that eliminates the need for preflush and postflush HCl acid stages,
reduces acid treatment complexity, reduces the HCl volumes needed, and reduces the overall treatment/rig time. Based
on the results obtained, the following conclusions can be drawn:
Regular sandstone acid must be used with a preflush stage of HCl acid to maximize its performance and
eliminate CaF
2
/MgF
2
precipitation. The need for a postflush stage must be confirmed with testing, as it can
damage sandstone that has HCl-sensitive clay mineral.
All selected one-step sandstone acid formulations (Acids A, B, C, and D) were able to successfully improve
permeability of Bandera sandstone cores.
For Bandera sandstone cores, increasing HCl/HF ratio increased the permeability enhancement and reduced the
injected acid volume.
Using the same acid volume and composition, a higher permeability enhancement was observed for a core that
had less clay and carbonate content.
Based on HCl:HF ratio and sandstone composition, a minimum acid volume is required to achieve a
permeability enhancement.
For Acid C, the feldspar content of sandstone can significantly affect the permeability enhancement acid, while
kaolinite content has no obvious effect.
All tested formulas had a very low corrosion rate (less than 0.03 lb/ft
2
).For both corrosion inhibitor types (CI-A
and B), the corrosion rate increased by reducing the HCl:HF ratio and/or inhibitor concentration.



SPE 164491 7
Recommendation
Three main steps are involved in conventional sandstone matrix treatment: preflush, main acid stage, and postflush.
However, based on the results obtained from this study Four one-step sandstone acid formulations (Acids A, B, C, and
D) were able to successfully improve permeability of sandstone cores. Formulations with high HCl:HF ratio (like Acid
A and B) are recommended for formations with high carbonate content and low HCl sensitive clay content While
formulations with lower HCl:HF ratio (like Acid C and D) are recommended for sandstone formations with low
carbonate content and more HCl-sensitive clay. However for the cores that has both high carbonate content and low HCl-
sensitive clay content, Acids B & C should be tested.

References
Bryant, S.L. and Buller, D.C. 1990. Formation Damage from Acid Treatments. Journal of SPE Production
Engineering 5(4): 455 -460.
Crowe, C.W. 1986. Precipitation of Hydrated Silica from Spent Hydrofluoric Acid: How Much of a Problem is it?
Journal of Petroleum Technology 38(11): 1234 - 1244.
Economides, M.J. and Nolte, K.G. 2010. Reservoir Stimulation. 3rd Edition, John Wiley Sons, ISBN: 0471491926
Ch 13 and 18.
Economides, M.J., Hill, A.D., and Economides, C.E. 1993. Petroleum Production System.. Prentice Hall PTR, New
Jersey, Ch. 14 and 15.
Gdanski, R. 1996. Kinetics of Tertiary Reactions of Hydrofluoric Acid on Aluminosilicates. Journal of SPE
Production & Facilities 13(2):75-80.
Gdanski, R.D. 1994. Fluosilicates Solubilities Impact HF Acid Compositions. Paper SPE 27404 presented at the
SPE Symposium on Formation Damage, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 7-10 February.
Hartman, R.L., Lecerf, B., Frenier, W., Ziauddin, M., and Fogler, H.S. 2006. Acid-Sensitive Aluminosilicates:
Dissolution Kinetics and Fluid Selection for Matrix Stimulation Treatments. Journal of SPE Production &
Operations 21(2): 194-204;
Ke, M. and Qu, Q. 2010. Method for Controlling Inorganic Fluoride Scales. US Patent 778138.
Kline, W.E. and Fogler, H.S. 1981. Dissolution Kinetics: Catalysis by Strong Acids. Journal Of Colloid And
Interface Science 82(1) 93:102.
Lullo, G.D. and Rae, P. 1996. A New Acid for True Stimulation of Sandstone. Paper SPE 37015 presented at the
6
th
SPE International Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference, Adelaide, Australia, 28-31 October.
Martin, A.N. 2004.Stimulating Sandstone Formations with non-HF Treatment Systems. Paper SPE 90774
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA, 26-29 September.
Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Hopkins, J.A., Shuchart, C.E., and Wilkinson, T. 1998. Aluminum Scaling and Formation
Damage due to Regular Mud Acid Treatment. Paper SPE 39483 presented at the International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 18-19 February.
Simon, D.E. and Anderson, M.S.1990. Stability of Clay Minerals in Acid. Paper SPE 19422 presented at the SPE
Formation Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 22-23 February.
Smith, C.F. and Hendrickson, A.R. 1965. Hydrofluoric Acid Stimulation of Sandstone Reservoirs. Journal of
Petroleum Technology 17(2): 215222.
Smith, C.F., Ross, W.M. and Hendrickson, A.R. 1965. Hydrofluoric Acid StimulationDevelopments for Field
Application. Paper SPE 1284 presented at the SPE Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, USA, 3-6 October.
Thomas, R.L., Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Lynn, J.D., Mehta, S., and Zaidi, S.R. 2001. Precipitation During the Acidizing
of a HT/HP Illitic Sandstone Reservoir in Eastern Saudi Arabia: A Laboratory Study. Paper SPE 71690
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 30 September-3
October.
Thomas, R.L., Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Mehta, S., Hilab, V., and Lynn, J.D. 2002.The Impact of HCl to HF Ratio on
Hydrated Silica Formation During the Acidizing of a High Temperature Sandstone Gas Reservoir in Saudi
Arabia. Paper SPE 77370 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonia,
Texas, USA, 29 September-2 October.
Wamser, C.A. 1948. Hydrolysis of Fluoboric Acid in Aqueous Solution. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 70:12091215.
Williams, B.B., Gidley, J.L., and Schechter, R.S. 1997. Acidizing Fundamentals. SPE Monograph Volume 6,
chapters 3, 4, 8 and 9.
8 SPE 164491
Table 1: The mineralogy of the Bandera sandstone cores.
Mineral Composition Wt%
Quartz 61
Feldspar 15
Dolomite 5
Illite 12
Kaolinite 4
Chlorite 2



Table 2: Summary of the core test results for regular sandstone acid system.
No.
Injection Fluid Sequence Permeability
Enhancement, %
Base fluid Preflush Main Treatment Postflush Base Fluid
1 5 wt% NH4Cl 10 wt% HCl regular sandstone acid 10 wt% HCl 5 wt% NH
4
Cl 28
2 5 wt% NH4Cl - regular sandstone acid - 5 wt% NH
4
Cl -67.5
3 5 wt% NH4Cl 10 wt% HCl regular sandstone acid - 5 wt% NH
4
Cl 32
4 5 wt% NH4Cl - regular sandstone acid 10 wt% HCl 5 wt% NH
4
Cl -53.30



Table 3: Summary of the core test results for Acids A, B, C, and D.
No.
Main
Treatment
Maximum Observed
Pressure Drop, psi
Injected
Volume, PV
Permeability
Enhancement, %
5 Acid A 154 12 113
6 Acid B 120 15 104
7 Acid C 105 16 86
8 Acid D 75 18 54



Table 4: The effect of injected acid volume.
No. Main Treatment Injected Volume, PV Permeability Enhancement, %
9 Acid C 4 -33
10 Acid C 8 26
11 Acid C 12 35
7 Acid C 16 86



Table 5: The effect of sandstone composition on the performances of 4 PV of Acid C.
Mineral Composition Bandera Berea
Quartz 61 87
Feldspar 15 3
Dolomite 5 1
Calcite - 2
Illite 12 1
Kaolinite 4 5
Chlorite 2 2
4 PV of Acid C
Permeability enhancement, % -33 86


SPE 164491 9

Table 6: The effect of sandstone composition on the performances of 8 PV of Acid C.
Mineral Composition Bandera FM #1 FM #2 FM #3
Quartz 61 69 92 86
Feldspar 15 23 - -
Dolomite 5 - - -
Siderite 0 - 3 2
Illite 12 2 Tr Tr
Kaolinite 4 4 4 10
Chlorite 2 Tr - -
8 PV of Acid C
Permeability enhancement, % 26 2.5 52.5 53.2


Table 7: The effect of fracture direction on the performances of 8 PV of Acid C.
Mineral Composition
Fracture Direction Is
Parallel To Flow
Direction
Fracture Direction
Is Perpendicular To
Flow Direction
Quartz
57 94
Feldspar 3 Tr
Dolomite - Tr
Calcite - Tr
Illite 33 4
Kaolinite
3 Tr
Chlorite - Tr
Siderite 3 1
8 PV of Acid C
Permeability Enhancement, % 330 165


Table 8: Corrosion test values for Acids A, B, and C at 180
o
F for 6 hrs.
Test
Acid
Type
Metal
Type
Inhibitor Type
Inhibitor
Concentration, gpt
Corrosion Rate,
Lbs./Sq. Ft.
Pitting
1 Acid A Cr-13 CI-A 2 0.0077 0
2 Acid A Cr-13 CI-A 5 0.0044 0
3 Acid A Cr-13 CI-A 10 0.0034 0
4 Acid A N-80 CI-A 10 0.004 1
5 Acid A N-80 CI-B 2 0.0095 1
6 Acid A N-80 CI-B 5 0.0051 0-1
7 Acid B Cr-13 CI-A 2 0.0132 0-1
8 Acid B Cr-13 CI-B 5 0.0123 0
9 Acid B Cr-13 CI-B 10 0.0047 0
10 Acid B N-80 CI-B 2 0.0072 1
11 Acid B N-80 CI-B 5 0.0052 1
12 Acid B N-80 CI-B 10 0.0043 1
13 Acid C Cr-13 CI-A 2 0.0162 1
14 Acid C Cr-13 CI-A 5 0.0267 1
15 Acid C N-80 CI-B 2 0.004 1
16 Acid C N-80 CI-B 5 0.004 0

10 SPE
164491






















Fig. 1: Diagram of the coreflood setup.


Fig. 2: Pressure drop across the core during injection of 4PV of preflush of HCl, 8 PV of conventional sandstone acid, 4
PV of postflush of HCl acid, temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.



Back Pressure
Regulator (1000 psi)
Fraction Collector

Differential Pressure
Transducer
Core Holder
Acid Accumulator
Heated Water
Accumulator
Pump
Heating
System
Data Acquisition
Overburden Pressure Pump
SPE 164491 11

Fig. 3: Pressure drop across the core during injection of only 8 PV of conventional sandstone acid (no preflush or
postflush of HCl acid), temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.



Fig. 4: Pressure drop across the core during injection of 12 PV of Acid A (no preflush or postflush of HCl acid),
temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.
12 SPE
164491

Fig. 5: Pressure drop across the core during injection of 15 PV of Acid B (no preflush or postflush of HCl acid),
temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.





Fig. 6: Pressure drop across the core during injection of 16 PV of Acid C (no preflush or postflush of HCl acid),
temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.
5ml/min
2ml/min
SPE 164491 13

Fig. 7: Pressure drop across the core during injection of 18 PV of Acid D (no preflush or postflush of HCl acid),
temperature is 180
o
F, acid injection rate is 2 ml/min, and Bandera sandstone core.





Top view of the core that has
fracture direction parallel to
flow direction
Side view of the core that
has fracture direction parallel
to flow direction
Side view of the core that has
fracture direction Perpendicular to
flow direction
Fig. 8: Photos of the fractured sandstone cores
5ml/min