Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Abstract
A new technique for characterizing secondary and tertiary
reactions during sandstone matrix stimulation treatments is
presented. In the new technique, traditional experiments on
short reservoir cores are supplemented with measurement of
the effluent element concentrations, batch reactor experiments
and geochemical simulations to predict the extent of secondary
and tertiary reactions in the reservoir treatment. Alternative
methods of characterizing secondary and tertiary reactions,
such as those using long core flow tests and laboratory radial
flow setups, are reviewed.
The new design technique is used in designing a treatment
for a well in the North Sea. Details of how this technique was
applied to the treatment design are presented. Post-treatment
data from the well showed a successful matrix treatment
design. The production from the well increased by 1,400%
immediately after the treatment. The 3-month stabilized
production gain was 650%.
Introduction
Recent studies on matrix stimulation have strongly
emphasized the importance of secondary and tertiary reactions
in determining the success of matrix stimulation treatments.1,2
However, the extent of these reactions under reservoir
conditions is difficult to quantify. Several factors make the
traditional acid response tests on short reservoir cores
inadequate for characterizing secondary and tertiary reactions.
First, secondary and tertiary reactions are slower than primary
reactions, and so much longer fluid residence times in the core
are required to observe these reactions. Second, linear flow
along the axis in cylindrical cores is not representative of
radial flow in a reservoir treatment. Third, cores used in the
core tests may not be representative of the entire
treatment interval.
SPE 86520
SPE 86520
Mark of Schlumberger
Thermodynamic Data
Thermodynamic data for mineral and aqueous species in
the geochemical simulator were obtained from various
literature compilations. The main sources of the data were the
compilations prepared by Wagman et al.,9 and Shock and
Helgeson.10 For species for which no reliable data were
available, thermodynamic constants were estimated from
solubility and bond energy data. Most of the solubility data for
this purpose were obtained from Linke.11 Currently, the
geochemical database in the simulator contains data for more
than 1,000 aqueous species and more than 100 minerals. Data
on organic acids, chelating agents, and many precipitates
formed during sandstone acidizing are included. The validity
range for most of the data is up to 600F and 50,000 psi.
Batch Reactor Tests
In the new technique, reaction kinetic data for minerals are
obtained from batch reactor tests.8 Batch reactors are ideal for
determining reaction kinetics of slow precipitation reactions,
such as secondary and tertiary reactions, because they can be
conveniently run at long fluid residence times, and allow
accurate quantification of precipitates because the reactor is
closed. In the new technique, the geochemical simulator
mathematically combines the reaction kinetics of individual
minerals obtained from batch reactor tests and predicts the
results for a mixture of minerals. A thermodynamic model is
used to predict interactions between the dissolution products
from various minerals. The main advantage of this approach is
that once the reaction kinetics for a pure mineral with a fluid
are determined, they can be reused in all future treatments in
which the same mineral and fluid system are encountered.
More than 100 batch reactor tests were conducted to
determine the reaction kinetics of common sandstone minerals
(clays, feldspars, zeolites, carbonates) with common fluids
over a temperature range of 75 to 300F. In these tests the
reaction rates were monitored by analyzing the element
concentrations in the aqueous phase with an inductively
coupled plasma spectrometer (ICP). X-ray diffraction (XRD),
nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometer and scanning
electron microscope were used to examine the solid phase as
needed. In addition, to test the ability of the thermodynamic
model to predict the interactions between dissolution products
from various minerals, several batch reactor tests were also
conducted with mixtures of minerals. The data from the tests
were archived in a database for easy retrieval for
future treatments.
Fig. 2 shows a sample of data from batch reactor tests that
were used in determining the reaction kinetics in the
geochemical simulator. Shown in the figure are the evolution
of Al and Si concentrations in the aqueous phase during
dissolution of kaolinite clay with 9/1 mud acid and fluoboric
acid. Symbols in the figure are the measured concentrations,
while the solid lines are model predictions. To examine the
sensitivity of the batch reactor test to secondary and tertiary
reactions, two simulations were conducted. In the first
simulation the primary, secondary, and tertiary reactions were
included in the model, and in the second simulation only the
primary reaction of the clay was included. For the 9/1 mud
acid, the predictions with and without secondary and tertiary
reactions start deviating significantly after about 5 min of
SPE 86520
Case Study
The case study presented here documents the use of the
new technique for a well in the North Sea. Additional case
studies using the new technique are presented in Ziauddin et
al.13 and Torres et al.14
Reservoir Description
The Galley Field is located wholly within UKCS Block
15/23a, approximately 145 km East-Northeast of Peterhead on
the Scottish mainland. The acreage is held under License with
Texaco North Sea UK Company (67.416%) as license holder
and partners being Summit UK Oil Limited (17.416%) and
ENI UK Limited (15.168%).
The Galley Field commenced production on 25 March
1998, and is currently producing from three oil accumulations;
two of which are Upper Jurassic Galley Sandstone Member
reservoirs and the other a Late Paleocene Cromarty sandstone
member reservoir. The Paleocene reservoir consists of two
main areas comprising Paleocene Forties turbidite stacked
channel and overbank reservoirs (Fig. 4). Reservoir properties
are depicted in Table 1. The subject well for this study, G5, is
situated in the Forties Channel. The Cromarty channel is a
narrow, sinuous channel of fine to very fine-grained, poorly
consolidated sandstone that is flanked by laterally extensive
overbank deposits. The pay zone height in the channel is about
48 ft and the temperature is about 162 F.
Well Description
Well G5 is an oil producer, completed horizontally with a
650-ft long openhole section. Fig. 5 shows the well log
marked with a channel sand near the heel of the well, followed
by a shale section and then by three main producing intervals
(marked as 1, 2, 3). It was intended to gravel pack this well,
but because of collapse of the shale section, only a quarter of
the wellbore length was packed. The remainder of the
wellbore length has only 100-m mesh screens with no gravel
behind it.
The production history for the well is shown in Fig. 6.
Initially the well produced without water. However, in March
2002, the water cut started increasing steadily. It reached a
level of 8% in May, after which the water cut suddenly
jumped to 20%. Oil production declined steadily from the
initial production rate of 7,000 BOPD. Even before the onset
of any water in March, the oil had declined by 50% in just 5
months of production and then by 72% when the water cut
jumped to 20%. The oil production had dropped to just 200
BOPD before the stimulation treatment was performed. This
decline from 7,000 to 200 BOPD was observed in just 1 year
of production. The wellhead pressure remained steady during
the decline.
Prior to the evaluation of G5 as a candidate for stimulation,
the well had produced about 1.1 MMbbl oil, 979 MMscf gas
and 31 Mbbl water. Stock tank original oil in place (STOOIP)
estimates for the whole Cromarty sandstone is approximately
3.7 MMbbl. G5 recoverable reserves are estimated at
approximately 1.6 to 1.9 MMbbl. It must be noted that G5 has
already produced nearly 30% of the estimated STOOIP, but
interestingly, the reservoir pressure has shown very little
SPE 86520
SPE 86520
SPE 86520
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Schlumberger, ChevronTexaco and their
partners ENI UK Ltd and Summit UK Oil Ltd, in the Galley
license for their permission to publish the paper. The authors
would also like to thank Justin Thomas for his invaluable
reservoir performance and economics analysis, Martin Taylor
and Liz Morris for help with core flow tests, and Richard
Warren for his interpretation of the real-time production
logging data.
References
1. Gdanski, R. SPE 37214 Kinetics of the Secondary
Reaction of HF on Alumino-Silicates in SPE
International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry,
1997. Houston.
SPE 86520
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
SPE 86520
Reservoir Properties
Porosity
2831%
Permeability
40100 mD
Residual water saturation
25%
Reservoir pressure
2,666 psi
Reservoir temperature
162F
Well Properties
API gravity
49.1
Gas/oil ratio
1,032 scf/bbl
Reserves for G5
2.1 MMbbl
6%
10%
77%
4%
3%
97%
3%
10
SPE 86520
k / k0
300F
Kaolinite 10%
Calcite 3%
Quartz 87%
Porosity 20%
Wellbore
Pay Zone
4 inch core
2
1
0
0
1
2
3
Distance from center of wellbore (ft)
Core Plug
(1-6 in)
Fig. 1. (a) Core plugs are only a small sample of the area of interest. (b) Permeability profiles after treatment of an undamaged reservoir with 12/3 mud
acid and an organic fluoboric acid
0.6
0.6
Conc (mol/kg)
Conc (mol/kg)
Si measured
Si with 2 and 3 Rxns
0.4
Al measured
.
0.2
Si measured
Si with 2 & 3 Rxns
0
0
100
Time (min)
200
300
100
Time (min)
200
300
Fig. 2. Data from batch reactor experiments used in determining the dissolution rate of kaolinite in 9/1 mud acid and fluoboric acid. The model
predictions are shown with and without secondary and tertiary reactions included in the model.
0.2
Si without 2 & 3 Rxns
(a)
Core Length 3 in
Acid Flux 0.03 cm/sec
Data from SPE 25212, Run 9
(b)
0.16
Core Length 3 in
Acid Flux 0.0099 cm/sec
Data from SPE 25212, Run 7
0.12
Si measured
0.08
Al without 2 & 3 Rxns
0.04
Concentration (mol/liter)
Concentration (mol/liter)
0.04
0
0
10
20
30
40
Pore Volume
50
60
10
20
30
40
Pore Volume
50
60
Fig. 3. Core tests used in the validation of the geochemical model. The model predictions are shown with and without secondary and tertiary reactions
included in the model
SPE 86520
11
G5 Production
800
OIL
6000
700
WHP
Oil
WATER
Water
600
5000
500
4000
400
3000
300
2000
1000
200
WHP
100
Date
Water BPD
7000
17 Da t
-N e
07 ov-0
-D
1
e
27 c-0
-D 1
e
16 c-0
-J 1
a
05 n-0
-F 2
e
25 b- 0
-F 2
e
17 b- 0
-M 2
a
06 r- 0
-A 2
p
26 r-0
-A 2
16 pr-0
-M 2
a
05 y- 0
-J 2
u
25 n-0
-J 2
un
15 -02
-J
04 u l- 0
-A 2
ug
-0
2
8000
12
SPE 86520
Effluent Concentrations
Permeability
0.06
200
(b)
Concentration (mol/kg)
Permeability (mD)
(a)
150
100
50
Acetic Acid
9/1 OMA
Brine
Acetic Acid
9/1 OMA
0.04
Brine
Si
Al
0.02
K
0
0
10
15
20
Pore Volumes Injected
25
10
15
20
Pore Volumes Injected
25
Fig. 7. Data from the core flow test used in calibration of the geochemical simulator. Symbols depict measured values, while solid lines depict model
results.
Skin Evolution
250
Without Fines
With Fines Stabilization
Stabilization Treatment
Treatment
Skin
200
150
100
HAc 10%
30 gal/ft
50
Brine
0
0
25
50
75
Volume (gal/ft)
100
Brine
125
Fig. 8. Skin evolution for reservoir treatment with OMA and a combination of OMA and fluoboric acid.
Mineral Vol(%)
Critical Matrix
Amorphous Silica Due to
Delay In Flow back
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
Distance from Center of Wellbore (ft)
Fig. 9. Amorphous silica profile in the reservoir at the end of the OMA treatment and after delay in flowback