SPE 68639

High Rate Formation-Pack a Technique for Sand/Water-Control

Surinder S Sachdeva, ONGC, Anil Johari, ONGC, Hasmukhbhai R. Patel, ONGC

Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and
Exhibition held in Jakarta, Indonesia, 1719 April 2001.
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, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes 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 where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
The oil industry continues to face the problem of sand
production /movement along with the oil/gas due to
migration of fine sand. The most common method for
sand control is mechanical method of sand-control by
gravel packing with installing a assembly in the well,
before commencement of oil/gas production. The gravelpack results in slightly lesser productivity due to
pressure-drop across the pack / liner. This also
sometimes results in complicated fishing in case of deep
/ inclined wells. An innovative idea of packing the
formation with suitable gravel at high rate has been tried
in-all 30 wells to arrest the movement of sand. It has
been termed as High Rate Formation-Pack
High Rate Formation Pack
This technique uses pumping of low viscosity carrying
fluid with gravel usually at rates of 2-5 bbls / min. The
goal is to restore a highly permeable connection
between well bore and the reservoir by pumping gravelladen slurry below the fracture extension pressure. Once
the injection rates for exceeding the fracture extension
pressure is determined, the job pumping rate can be
designed from the following:
HRFP pumping rate =fracture extension rate +returns
rate-2 bbls / min.
The actual job can be designed with either a
continuous sand concentration of 1-2 ppg typically, or
the job can be designed by using alternately stages of
pad and slurry. The choice of pad (fluid with no sand)
and slurry is generally used in zones that have a
significant amount of permeability variation. This

technique has been successfully implemented in more

than 30 wells (including 20 inclined wells) with depths of
above or about 9000-10,000 ft.
Introduction
One of the oil fields of Arakan Basin of the north-eastern
part of India is divided in many fault blocks due to
tectonic activities .The main producing sands belong to
the Brail group divided into two unit. The main producing
sands of the field are confined to the upper part of the
lower arenaceous unit consisting of loosely consolidated
sands, silty light grey to white in color and fine to
medium grained .Occasionally bands of sandstone
cemented by calcium carbonate are present .The
formation is deposited in a marine brackish water to
littoral environment with salinity around 5 to 6 gms./lt.
The average calcareous content of BMS is 4 to 6 %with
permeability from 100-500 md. The field is broad
anticline and has been dived into 4 blocks with main
producers being block I & II .
The field started producing sand due to increase
in water-cut. Being active water drive, isolation of the
bottom zone and selective perforations is the policy
adopted to reduce the water production. Since the
payzone is continuously perforated, it is not possible to
isolate the bottom portion with bridge plug / packer.
Therefore cement squeezing at the bottom and selective
perforation was carried out in many wells In several
wells the influx decreased drastically due to sand
incursion and this led us to believe the presence of
cavity / channel behind casing which may have extended
in high saturation area leading to accelerated water-cut.
Thus the problem of sand / water cut continued for
sometime. The problem of sand cut was however tried to
tackle with conventional mechanical gravel-pack in early
nineties but with little success. This further led to a
thought for packing a created cavity with highly
permeable gravel with low viscosity fluid and providing
the additional bondage by cementation followed by
selective perforation. It has long been realized that
gelled carrier fluids used in gravel packing are not only
potentially formation damaging but are also often
inadequate in providing complete grain packing in the
gravel-packed completion .The operators review of past

SURINDER S SACHDEVA, ANIL JOHARI, HASMUKHBHAI R. PATEL

gravel packs revealed that in wells with intervals less

than 40 ft. a moderate success rate was experienced in
completely packing the interval. However ,as the interval
length exceeded 40 ft., partial and complete voids
became increasing prevalent. It was there-fore observed
that as the length of the perforation interval increases
beyond 30-40 ft., the failure rate of achieving a 100 %
pack also increases as has been observed due to the
presence of voids seen on the gravel pack logs. This
observation was independent of length of perforation
interval, hole deviation and casing size. Voids in gravelpacks often result in failure of production levels leading
to additional costs to the company. Such costs can be in
the form of reduced revenue from rate impairment, or in
the form of remedial work-overs that attempts to repair
the void by moving the gravel-pack sand in the blank
reserve down to the void, or in the form of a major workover to pull the complete assembly and repack the
interval. In addition to the presence of voids, experience
has shown that gravel packing with gelled carrier fluids
using HEC sometimes required post acid treatments to
clean up the gels and often resulted in longer turn
around times to bring back such gravel packed
completions on full production levels.
Acknowledging the above, the stimulation /
service engineers continuously improved on their
packing techniques to maximize gravel packing
efficiency as well as reduce completion costs. However
these gravel packing techniques of sand-control were
being widely accepted till 1995-96, but with acceptable
pressure-drop. Pressure is lost in a gravel-packed
perforated completion at the reservoir, including a
damaged zone near the well bore; at the perforation
tunnels; gravel pack in the screen / casing annulus; and
the screen & the tubing . The gravel pack, however, has
the potential of being the single greatest source of
pressure loss.
The generalized pressure drop equation for
gravel packed completion in an oil well is:
P wfs - P wf = V P
where : P wfs = sand face pressure, psi
P wf = inside the gravel pack
pressure, psi
The gravel-pack completions over a period of time in
addition to the pressure drop also started loosing its
preference due to:

remedial treatments in-execution through

the pack
frequent complicated
fishing in deep
/deviated wells
maintenance of original production levels
cost effectiveness

SPE 68639

Concept of High-Rate Formation Pack

A high-rate formation pack is a self diverting and
treatments have been very effective in deep / inclined
wells. Gravel size equivalent to those used in gravel
packing are generally the best selection for high-rate
formation packs. Pumping rate is determined based on
the length of the zone to be packed and step rate test.
The returns rate is restricted so that all but 2 bbls / min is
forced in to the perforations. A minimum leak-off rate of
3 bbls / min is required to ensure that the fluid has
enough velocity to part the formation and transport the
gravel efficiently. High-rate formation packs tend to open
up more perforations and place more gravel into the
perforation tunnels. Therefore, these treatments have
been carried out in wells where formation damage is not
expected to be excessive. (fig.1- 3)
Advantages
The study of the problems of the gravel-packed wells led
to the use of high-rate formations packs for sand /water
control. This technique has been successfully used in
many old wells & new wells. This technique with the use
of low viscous fluid allows gravel placement through the
near well-bore damaged zone, providing good hydraulic
communication between the reservoir and the well. The
advantages of high-rate formation pack are listed below:

low viscosity carrier fluids avoid formation damage

rig-site step rate test customizes procedure for given
application
operations performed with economical , rig based
equipment
near wellbore fractures extend completion beyond
damaged zone to improve well productivity
gravel infuser allows use of low-viscosity carrier
fluids
allows full well-bore availability even after packing
the cavity
cost economical

High-Rate Formation Pack

High-rate formation pack completions are used in
formations in non-quick sands where pre-job injection
tests indicate that the formation can be fractured just
below fracturing pressure due to leverage with the use
of a low viscous fluid. These formations typically have
low to moderate damage that can be easily penetrated
with a short fracture. The high-rate packs were
developed to overcome the high leak-off problems
encountered with standard packs in high permeability
formations .The more effective high-rate packs are
essentially completed by pumping gravel till tip-out and
usually preceded by an acid pre-pack.
A comparison of well performance based on
production rates, as well as comparison of bottom-hole
pressure build-up data, is included for each well .These

SPE 68639

HIGH RATE FORMATION-PACK A TECHNIQUE FOR SAND/WATER-CONTROL

high rate formation pack treatments are followed by a

open-ended cement squeeze and then selective
perforations based on OWC and complete sand
thickness .The production rates are then monitored for
the optimum production levels .In wells which are cutting
sand as well as water these HRFP treatments are
carried out using poly-acrilamides as the base fluid for
carrying out sand-control in place of conventional low
viscosity fluids. After the HRFP treatment, it is also
sameway followed by a cement squeeze and selective
perforations before final completion.
This paper now presents two case histories of
HRFP wells one of block I and the other of block II that
were performed in the fields of north-eastern in INDIA,
during a period of one year. The high rate formation
pack using gravel with the described procedure proved
100% successful in results by providing excellent gravel
pack in these wells .The performance when compared to
prior mechanical gravel packs, the HRFP resulted in
superior packs by providing void-free packing and
eliminating production damage / complicated fishing that
are often caused after mechanical gravel-pack
completions.
Case history no 1
The first case history is from a oil-bearing sandstone
reservoir at approximately 9,200 ft. true vertical depth in
an oil field in north-eastern part of India .These three
wells are in the same sand formation and same fault
block I .Well A was a gravel-pack completion using a
bottom-hole GP assembly at a low sand concentration of
1-2 ppg and 20/40 mesh The well was perforated with 3
gun ,8 spf and completed with a SRP completion in
Jan. 1995 .Due to the success of this completion ,Well B
was completed in the same sand initially with a drilling
rig itself in Feb. 1995 in order to save the money on
work-over rig cost. This well was also perforated with 3
gun, 8 spf and completed with a bottomhole
assembly. A high density gravel-pack was performed
with a sand concentration of 10-12 ppg and 20/40 mesh
.A screen out occurred as the flow rate was reduced to 2
bbls /min. The well was finally completed with 2 7/8, 6.4
ppf production tubing from gravel pack packer to
surface. Another old Well C was completed in Jun. 1996
with a high rate formation pack at 4 -5 bbls /min in the
exist perforations after surging and casing / tubing clean
operations. The well was then perforated selectively
after cement squeeze and then completed finally with
suitable gas-lift. The comparison of the production rates
from these wells and their corresponding tubing
pressures are shown in table-1/chart-1.
Case history no 2
The second case history is from a set of oil-bearing
sandstone reservoir with high water-cut at an average
vertical depth of 9100 ft. These wells have been
experiencing sand and water-cut shortly after their initial

completion in fault block II. Well AA was treated first for

water-cut and then subsequently completed with
bottomhole gravel pack assembly using screen as liner
.The well was perforated with 4gun, 8 spf and acid
stimulation was also carried out prior to the gravel-pack
completion .The treatment was carried out in Sep. 1996
with a filtered fluid and ramping the sand concentration
from 2 ppg to 10 ppg . whereby placing a total of 145
pounds of sand behind pipe per foot of perforations with
a screen-out occurring at 8 ppg stage. The screen
liners used were of 2 3/8, 10 gauge and a 2 7/8 ,6.4 ppf
production tubing string was from the gravel-pack packer
to the surface .Well BB was completed in Feb. 1997 with
a high-rate formation pack (HRFP) using polyacrilamide
based filtered gel as the carrying fluid ,with a sand
concentration of 2 ppg at the rate of 4-5 bbls / min in
the same perforations after surging and casing /tubing
clean operations. The well then perforated selectively
after cement squeeze and finally completed with a 2
7/8, 6.4 ppf production string up to the surface with SRP
installed at a depth of 3,250 ft. The comparison of the
production rates from these wells and their
corresponding tubing pressures are shown in table 2/
chart-2.
Multi-rate tests were performed on these wells
prior to the HRFP job to evaluate the datas for final
execution. The completion cost with respect to sandcontrol treatment of well AA was averaged $ 94,500 &
that of a HRFP $29,000 based on the reserves and the
rate restrictions which were placed on each well, the net
present value is not a valid nor a meaningful
comparison.
This paper also includes compartion of five wells
completed with HRFP indicting the pre and post well
performance in the table-3/ chart-3 (1- 5)
Conclusions & Recommendations
1

High Rate Formation Pack with filtered

completion fluids provides exceptional results
as demonstrated by the well productivity.
The technique of HRFP is successful when the
following condition exist.

Shallow radius of damage

Highly deviated wellbores
Non-contiguous peforations
Perforated interval greater than 30 ft.
Formation susceptible to asphaltines.

HRFP tend to result in more perforations in

communications with the formation and higher
than expected gravel permeability. The high
gravel permeability may
be indicative of
preferred flow channels along near wellbore
fractures.

SURINDER S SACHDEVA, ANIL JOHARI, HASMUKHBHAI R. PATEL

For oil wells the completion pressure drop

is dominated by the gravel permeability and
not the effective shot density. HRFP are
therefore the preferred completion technique
for reservoirs with good permeability and clean
sands .
The
high-rate
pack
through
selective
perforation after cement squeeze has been
able to control effectively both sand & water in
a single stage operation.
The full well-bore availability leads to any kind
of work-over or stimulation operation that are
required after the job.

References
1. Haynes, C.D.,Gray, K.E., " Sand
Particle
Transport in
Perforated Casing" SPE 403
October, 1972.
2. Novonty, R.,Maston, R.P., " Laboratory Observations
of Gravel
Placement Techniques" SPE 5659,
September, 1975.
3. Shyrock, S.G., "Gravel-Packing Studies in a FullScale Deviated Model Wellbore" SPE 9421,
September, 1980.
4. McLeod, H.O., Crawford, H.R.,"Gravel Packing for
High Rate Completions" SPE 11008 September,
1984
5. Welling, R.W.F., Nyland, T.,"Detailed Testing of
Gravel-packed Completions" OSEA 90121,
December, 1990.
6. Welling, R.W.F., Jonathan, P., Reijnen, P.H.F.,
Samuel, A.J., "Quantifying
the Factors
Influencing Gravel Placement and Productivity
of an
Internally
Gravel Packed
Completion based on Field Data Analysis" SPE
30113, 1995.
7. Allen, T.O. and
Roberts, A.P., Production
Opertations
Vol I, Oil & Gas Consultants,
Tulsa ,1982.

SPE 68639

SPE 68639

HIGH RATE FORMATION-PACK A TECHNIQUE FOR SAND/WATER-CONTROL

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

A SELF DIVERTING - HRFP

CONVENTIONAL SCREEN / LINER

COMPELTION

GRAVEL
PERFORATION
TUNNEL
SCREEN
FORMATION

CEMENT

CASING

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

SURINDER S SACHDEVA, ANIL JOHARI, HASMUKHBHAI R. PATEL

Table -1
Well / Depth / Job
type
A 9200 ft. Low ppg
GP / SRP
B 9250 ft. High ppg
GP
C 9230 ft. HRFP /
cementation

Production Data

Production Before job

QL : M3
19

WC %
65

Production After job

Qo : M3
7

New Drilled Well

70

85

SPE 68639

11

QL : M3
15

WC %
60

Qo : M3
6

20

18

48

65

17

Chart -1
90

80

70

QL, WC, Qo

60
Production Before job QL : M3
Production Before job WC %
Production Before job Qo : M3
Production After job QL : M3
Production After job WC %
Production After job Qo : M3

50

40

30

20

10

0
A 9200 ft. Low ppg GP / SRP

B 9250 ft. High ppg GP

Well / Job type

C 9230 ft. HRFP / cementation

SPE 68639

HIGH RATE FORMATION-PACK A TECHNIQUE FOR SAND/WATER-CONTROL

Table - 2 Production Data

Well / Depth / Job
type

AA 9100 ft. WSO &

GP 10-12 ppg
BB 9135 ft. HRFPPolyacrilamide
cementation, SRP

Production Before job

QL : M3

WC %

Production After job

Qo : M3

QL : M3

WC %

Qo : M3

50

98

43

70

13

54

90

46

50

23

Chart 2
120

100

QL, WC, Qo

80
Production Before job QL : M3
Production Before job WC %
Production Before job Qo : M3
Production After job QL : M3
Production After job WC %
Production After job Qo : M3

60

40

20

0
AA 9100 ft. WSO & GP 10-12 ppg

BB 9135 ft. HRFP- Polyacrilamide cementation, SRP

Well / Job type

SURINDER S SACHDEVA, ANIL JOHARI, HASMUKHBHAI R. PATEL

SPE 68639

Table - 3 Performance Comparision

Well / Date
/ HRFP

Before
job

After
job

status
ason
31/3/2000

Before
job

After
job

status
ason
31/3/2000

Before
job

After
job

status
ason
31/3/2000

A, 29/6/96
B, 28/2/97
C, 28/5/97
D, 26/6/98
E,12/12/98

QL : M3
70
54
22
67
28

QL : M3
48
46
26
40
32

QL : M3
45
43
41
41
38

WC %
85
90
38
92
78

WC %
65
50
53
40
10

WC %
90
28
40
40
8

Qo : M3
11
5
14
5
6

Qo : M3
17
23
12
24
29

Qo : M3
5
31
25
25
35

Tabel -3 (2)
100

90

90

80

80

70

70

60

60

QL,WC,Qo

100

50
40

50
40

30

30

20

20
10

10

Well- B, 28/2/97

A, 29/6/96

Well / Date / HRFP

Well / Date / HRFP

Table - 3 (4)

Table - 3 (3)
100

60

90
50

80
70

QL,WC,Qo

QL,WC,Qo

40

30

20

60
50
40
30
20

10
10
0

Well- D, 26/6/98

Well- C, 28/5/97

Well / Date / HRFP

T a b le

- 3

(5 )

Well / Date / HRFP

9 0
B e fo re

jo b

Q L

: M 3

8 0
A f te r jo b

Q L : M 3

7 0
s ta tu s o n

3 1 /3 /2 0 0 0 Q L : M 3

6 0
B e fo re
QL,WC,Qo

QL,WC,Qo

Table -3 (1)

jo b

W C

5 0
A f te r jo b

W C

4 0
s ta tu s o n

3 1 /3 /2 0 0 0 W C

3 0
B e fo re

jo b

Q o

: M 3

2 0
A f te r jo b

Q o : M 3

1 0
s ta tu s o n
0
W e ll- E , 1 2 /1 2 /9 8
W e ll / D a t e / H R F P

3 1 /3 /2 0 0 0 Q o : M 3