You are on page 1of 10

SPE 103209

Deepwater Completion Challenges Redefine Best Practices for Completion and


Packer Fluid Selection
P.H. Javora, SPE, R. Stevens, SPE, and C. Devine, SPE, BJ Services Co.; S. Jeu, SPE, Thunderbyrd Energy Services;
M. Simmons, SPE, Noble Energy Inc.; and G. Firmin, SPE, G. Poole, SPE, B. Franklin, SPE, and Q. Qu, SPE,
BJ Services Co.

Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum Engineers


completion and packer fluids are also presented. The best fit-
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2006 SPE Annual Technical Conference and for-purpose fluid was selected by following this new paradigm
Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, U.S.A., 2427 September 2006.
for a GOM deepwater project. Lessons learned are
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
summarized in the paper.
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 Introduction
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
Deepwater wells have been completed successfully in the Gulf
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is of Mexico for nearly 10 years, during which time numerous
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 new learnings were experienced. One dramatic example is the
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.
crystallization of completion brine above its True
Crystallization Temperature (TCT) due to the application of
Abstract high pressure1. This phenomenon was encountered while
New materials used in deepwater production tubulars, and the running screen and washpipe at Shells Ram/Powell
increasingly complex and costly deepwater projects, demand development in 3,214 ft of water when CaCl2/CaBr2 brine
greater attention to the design and selection of completion and crystallized unexpectedly and completely blocked the
packer fluids. This requires an integrated approach, from mud wellbore flow path2. The entire assembly had to be retrieved
displacement through final sand control completion, in order in order to remove the plugging. Since then, the Pressure
to optimize fluid compatibility and effectiveness. In addition Crystallization Temperature (PCT) of completion brine has
to standard compatibilities with reservoir rock and fluid, been evaluated in some detail and currently an API work
compatibilities of completion or packer fluid with control line, group is reviewing the available test methods and apparatus3.
stimulation, and production fluids must be considered. Now, completion brine PCT evaluation must be incorporated
Furthermore, compatibility of completion and packer fluids into the pre-planning process for completing deepwater wells.
with production tubular metallurgies must be assured in order Pre-Planning and evaluation for deepwater projects has
to prevent environmental cracking. The impact of the taken on new dimensions, and testing technologies that were
production environment on the potential formation of gas routinely used for some time have been re-evaluated and
hydrates or crystallization of brine due to pressure, at the near- enhanced to provide optimum results. New testing regimes
freezing mudline temperatures, must be understood for each of and paradigms have continuously been introduced into every
the wellbore fluids used during the completion process. For phase of the completion process, from mud displacement to
some projects, more than one completion or packer fluid packer fluid selection.
choice is available, in which case each fluid should be Another powerful experience impacting deepwater projects
evaluated to select the best fit-for-purpose fluid. is the formation of gas hydrates that are capable of totally
blocking inflow and outflow from a well. Gas hydrates of
This paper presents a new paradigm for testing and evaluating oilfield interest, known for more than 100 years, have been
completion and packer fluids for selection in deepwater widely published4, 5 and can be generated at temperatures well
applications. Details for each test procedure and evaluation above the freezing point of water when high pressure is
method are presented and include completion or packer fluid exerted on a hydrocarbon gas-water mixture. Hydrate
compatibilities with formation or synthetic formation water, formation is of intense interest around the mudline in
control line fluids, and produced fluids. Core flow studies deepwater applications where the water temperature is about
used to test fluid compatibility with the formation rock, and 38F and high pressure is expected. Whenever hydrocarbon
standard stress-cracking tests, conducted according to NACE gas is produced, the operator necessarily controls the fluid
guidelines, used to avoid the potential for environmentally environment within the production tubing especially during
assisted cracking of chrome production tubulars, are startups and in the packer annulus, should this fluid contact
presented. Specialized evaluation methods to avoid the produced gas, in order to prevent hydrate formation and the
formation of gas hydrates and the pressure crystallization of potential blocking of production and well entry.
2 SPE 103209

A subtle, but similarly remarkable experience is the typically require no additional additives. Because of the
advancements gained in mud displacement technology in intense interest in gas hydrate inhibitors, much work has been
recent years. Displacing drilling mud with clear solids-free conducted with brines of all densities, low molecular weight
completion brine is a critical step during well completion and alcohols (LMWA), organic solvents, kinetic inhibitors, and
new displacement paradigms have recently been introduced, combinations thereof. This hydrate information has been
including the use of effective brine-weighted solids-free high- converted into simulation models that are now used
density wellbore cleaning fluids6 and the use of non-weighted extensively to predict hydrate formation4, 5. Nonetheless, the
emulsion-based displacement fluids7. While this challenging ever increasing demands created by new environmental
task was accomplished with a brine-weighted solids-free situations at times require laboratory testing, even if only to
surfactant spacer system for the project reported herein, new confirm model predictions.
paradigms for displacement technology have been robustly In the present deepwater case, 15.6 ppg brine was required
covered in the references cited. for the working fluid and a lighter brine for the packer fluid.
The ever-changing demands of deepwater have impacted Both formate and halide brines were considered for this
other routine testing and evaluation technologies that have project, but because of issues described later, halide brines
been utilized for more than 15 years, as exemplified by the were selected.
important completion brine-formation water compatibilities8 The 15.6 ppg zinc-based working brine was formulated to
and completion brine-formation rock compatibilities9. contain the equivalent of 3% potassium chloride. This brine
Likewise, these technologies have been reworked into was easily qualified by simulation PCT well below the 38oF
essential testing regimes and paradigms currently applied to mudline temperature and hydrate equilibrium pressure well
deepwater completions. These advanced testing regimes above the 9,200 psia maximum shut-in pressure at the subsea
provide additional information critical to ensuring successful tree.
deepwater completions. For the packer fluid, the standard 11.5 ppg sodium
Other areas critical to the qualification of potential bromide, which offered compatibility with control line fluid
completion brines and packer fluids include the formulation of and methanol and a low corrosion potential, did not have
fluid loss control pills, the application of an appropriate frac sufficient hydrate inhibition. Therefore, various additives
fluid, possibly even a weighted frac fluid, pre-frac acidizing were evaluated, and it was determined through simulation that
and potentially acid stimulations in the future. These the packer fluid would need to contain at least 18% and
important issues, among others, were equally addressed and preferably 25% of an LMWA. Simulation results for the 11.5
evaluated, but will not be discussed further. ppg sodium bromide packer fluids are presented in Figure 1.
As the industry engages more-demanding environments,
testing and evaluation methods will be enhanced further and Gas Hydrate Simulation
new testing and evaluation protocols developed for those more Figure 1
12,000
severe completion environments.
Packer Fluid II
10,000
Completion and Packer Fluid Evaluations
Pressure (psi)

Test procedures and evaluation methods utilized to qualify 8,000


potential completion brine candidates for specific deepwater Packer Fluid I
6,000
applications are discussed in this portion of the paper.
The selected brine should possess certain characteristics 4,000
appropriate for the intended application. In addition to
conventional considerations, the selection criteria of a brine or 2,000
packer fluid should include preventing the formation of gas
0
hydrates and brine crystallization at low mud-line
0 10 20 30 40 50
temperatures and high pressures, and protecting the production
tubing from environmental stress corrosion cracking, etc. Temperature (F)
Potential completion brines must be compatible with Figure 1: Modified 11.5 ppg Sodium Bromide Packer Fluids
formation water, produced hydrocarbons, and other selected containing 18 and 25% LMWA, Respectively
fluids, such as control line fluid, methanol, and injection
chemicals (wax or asphaltene inhibitors). Pressure Crystallization Temperature (PCT) of Brine
Completion brines must also be compatible with the As a result of the PCT problems experienced at Shells
reservoir rock. Studies include mineralogical evaluations (X- Ram/Powell development, extensive research was devoted to
ray diffraction, environmental scanning electron microscopy, understanding the phenomenon. The equipment developed to
thin-section analysis), and ranking tests such as capillary measure brine PCT was unique, generally rated for operating
suction testing (CST), linear swell measurements (LSM), and pressures to 20,000 psi, and typically followed the standards
coreflow studies. for measuring TCT found in API RP-13J or ISO-13503-310.
The PCT data developed was converted into models that are
Gas Hydrate Evaluation used to determine the PCT of known systems. As with gas
Highly-concentrated salt solutions (high-density completion hydrates, the ever increasing demands created by new
brines) are efficient thermodynamic hydrate inhibitors and environmental situations at times require laboratory testing.
SPE 103209 3

Based on PCT information collected, the 15.6 ppg zinc- Table 1: Selected Formation Water Characteristics
based working brine containing the equivalent of 3% Principle Characteristics Concentration, mg/L
potassium chloride and modified 11.5 ppg sodium bromide
brine packer fluid were qualified to meet the well design Chloride 147,000
requirement for fluids, 35F PCT @ 10,000 psi. Bi-Carbonate 470
Sulfate 200
Environmental Stress Corrosion Cracking / Sodium 90,600
Corrosion Potassium 500
Recent field failures of corrosion resistant alloy (CRA) Calcium 8,930
production tubing due to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) have Magnesium 1,500
been reported in recent years and have been summarized in Barium 208
SPE 9018811. It has therefore become standard practice to Strontium 215
determine the vulnerability of CRA tubulars, especially high- pH 7.33
strength CRA tubulars, to specific types of completion brines
and packer fluids. Testing is conducted with the actual tubing
that will be used in the deepwater project whenever possible.
Table 2: Compatibility of Brine with Synthetic Water or Formation
Test procedures, machining practices, and calculation of Water
the deflection necessary to obtain the desired stress, are based
on the NACE Standard TM0177-96, Method C. After the C- Brine System 75% water / 50% Water / 25% Water /
Water @ Temperature 25% Brine 50% Brine 75% Brine
ring is stressed, it is immediately immersed into the test brine
contained in a Teflon cup inside a pressure vessel. The 13.1 ppg Potassium Formate Huge amount
pressure vessel is purged with 100 psig N2 three times to Synthetic Water @ 70F --- of settled solids ---
remove the air contained in the headspace, pressurized to 200 15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Copious
Optimized Formulation #1
psig N2 or other test gas at 70oF, tested for leaks, and placed Synthetic Water @ 70F Clear
Copious amount
of settled solids
amount of
settled solids
into an oven at the desired test temperature. After the desired 15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Copious
test duration, usually 15 or 30 days, the C-ring coupon is taken Optimized Formulation #1 Some Settled Copious amount amount of
Synthetic Water @ 180F Solids of settled solids settled solids
out from the brine, soaked with inhibited HCl, washed with
soap and water, dried and examined for SCC, pitting, localized 15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Significant Significant
corrosion and general corrosion under a microscope. Optimized Formulation #2 amount of amount of
Synthetic Water @ 70F Clear settled solids settled solids
Additional weight-loss corrosion testing can be performed 15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Significant
on the casing metals used in the wellbore or standard metal Optimized Formulation #2 amount of
coupons such as C-4130, as described in SPE 8756312. Synthetic Water @ 180F settled solids Clear Clear

Based on historic data and laboratory testing at 180F with 15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Significant Significant
the specific tubulars used in this project (HP1 13Cr 110YS) Optimized Formulation #2 amount of amount of
for 14 days, the inhibited 15.6 ppg zinc-based brine containing Formation Water @ 70F settled solids settled solids Clear
15.4 ppg Cesium Formate Significant Significant
potassium chloride resulted in an as new coupon without Optimized Formulation #2 amount of amount of
pitting, cracking or corrosion. Furthermore, weight-loss tests Formation Water @ 180F settled solids settled solids Clear
performed with C-4130 immersed in the zinc-based brine 15.6 ppg Zinc-Based Brine
resulted in a uniform corrosion rate of only 2.5 mpy (mills per Formation Water @ 70F Clear Clear Clear
year) for a seven-day test. 15.6 ppg Zinc-Based Brine
Formation Water @ 180F Clear Clear Clear
Formation Water Completion Brine Compatibility
Compatibility with the formation water was determined by Formation Hydrocarbon Completion Brine
mixing the selected brines with formation water in ratios of Compatibility
25/75, 50/50 and 75/25 at ambient and bottom-hole Compatibilities of selected completion brine candidates with
temperatures. Samples are subsequently observed for the formation hydrocarbons downhole are determined by mixing
formation of potentially damaging solid precipitates. the selected brines with formation hydrocarbon in a 50/50
When no produced water or only a small volume of ratio at bottom-hole temperatures, in this example 180F. The
produced water is available, testing is conducted using capped samples are shaken vigorously to facilitate the
laboratory-prepared synthetic formation water. Synthetic formation of any potential emulsions, stabilized at temperature
formation water can also be used in range-finding tests, saving and periodically shaken. The heat aged, shaken samples are
the limited formation water samples for critical or then observed static during the next 15 minutes. The degree
confirmation tests. of oil/brine separation is quantified, and the sharpness of the
Chemical analysis for the formation water obtained at oil/brine interface and quality of the separated brine are
18,710 feet MD is provided in Table 1, and the compatibility reported. To assess the tendency to form emulsions at other
results are provided in Table 2. conditions, similar observations are conducted at prescribed
temperatures.
Results from compatibility testing between the zinc-based
completion brine and formation oil are presented in Table 3,
4 SPE 103209

expressed as percent compatible. Similar tests are conducted Formation Rock Completion brine Interaction
to evaluate emulsion inhibitors and sweet spot loadings. Prior to flow testing formation cores in the laboratory, a
mineralogical evaluation is obtained, using X-ray Diffraction
Table 3: Percent Compatibility of Completion Brine with Analysis, Thin Section examination, and Environmental
Formation Oil
Scanning Electron Microscopy. Clay type and mineralogy
5 10 15
helps to identify potential fluid systems to test. These tests
Brine System
1
minutes minutes minutes Comments require some time to complete and were running concurrently
with Capillary Suction Time (CST) testing on shale samples.
15.6 ppg Zinc- Clean, Sharp CST and Linear Swell Measurements (LSM) testing are used
Based Brine 20 60 100 Interface to screen fluids as they offer quick results.
15.6 ppg Zinc-
Flow testing of core plugs is the final step to confirm that
Based Brine with Clean, Sharp
2
the selected fluid systems will not cause damage to the
non-emulsifier 100 100 100 Interface formation. Plugs of proper size and covering a range of
1 permeability are needed for meaningful conclusions.
50% Brine System / 50% Formation Oil
2
0.25% emulsifier concentration by volume While the methods and techniques described in this section
are not new, each one contributed significant information that
was used to make the best fit-for-purpose selection of
Control Line Fluid Completion Brine Compatibility
completion brine and packer fluid.
Compatibility with control line fluids are determined by
mixing the selected brines with control line fluids in ratios of
25/75, 50/50 and 75/25 at ambient, mud-line and the expected Mineralogical Evaluation
flow-line temperatures. Mud-line temperatures generally range X-Ray Diffraction Analysis (XRD)
Samples for sensitivity testing are analyzed using both
from 38 to 40F for deep-water applications. Samples are
bulk (whole sample) and fine (clay-size fraction) X-ray
subsequently observed for the formation and coagulation of
diffraction analysis. Sample portions are gently crushed, and
solid precipitates or emulsions that could potentially plug the
crushed material is thoroughly mixed. Half the crushed
control line.
material is ground to a fine powder, loaded into a standard
This procedure can also be used to evaluate other fluids
that might be used in the wellbore downhole or at the mud- sample holder and scanned with Cu K radiation through a
line, such as methanol or low dose hydrate inhibitors, anti- diffraction angle of 2 to 60 2. The chemistry of the bulk
scaling agents and organic deposition inhibitors typically sample is then determined by X-ray Fluorescence analysis for
introduced through injected lines. fine-tuning the interpretation. The second portion of the
Results from the compatibility of the control line fluid with crushed mixture is treated to remove organic material and to
the packer fluid are presented in Table 4. Table 5 contains the remove iron. After treatment, the clay-size fraction is
results from compatibility studies of the packer fluid with a separated, and the clay-size fraction is analyzed in both air-
paraffin/asphaltene inhibitor. dried and glycolated states.
This very important technique resulted in a quantitative
Table 4: Compatibility of Packer Fluid with Control Line Fluid description of the rock mineralogy, and, therefore, highlighted
potential water sensitivities of the rock due to the expandable
Packer Fluid System 1 75% Control Line 50% Control Line 25% Control Line
Control Line Fluid Fluid / Fluid / Fluid / clays and potentially migrating zeolite material. The presence
@ Temperature 25% Packer Fluid 50% Packer Fluid 75% Packer Fluid of acid-sensitive zeolites drove the selection of the pre-frac
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2 acid 5% HCl and 10% acetic acid. Results from X-ray
Control Line Fluid Complete Complete Complete
@ 35F Compatibility Compatibility Compatibility diffraction analyses are summarized in Table 6.
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2
Control Line Fluid Complete Complete Complete
@ 70F Compatibility Compatibility Compatibility Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (ESEM)
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2
Control Line Fluid Complete Complete Complete Small chips of selected samples from test wells are
1
@ 180F Compatibility
2
Compatibility
2
Compatibility
2
cleaned, using toluene vapor extraction, dried at 150 F
Packer Fluid #2 was 11.5 ppg Sodium Bromide containing 25% LMWA
2
Color change from blue to green
overnight, affixed to a standard aluminum SEM stubs, and
coated with gold, using a sputter coater. Samples are then
Table 5: Compatibility of Packer Fluid with Organic Deposition individually placed in the chamber of the SEM, and vacuum is
Inhibitor applied. The principal objective of this examination is to
Packer Fluid System 1 observe the distribution of clay minerals and other authigenic
Organic Deposition
Inhibitor 2 75% Inhibitor / 50% Inhibitor / 25% Inhibitor /
cements in the pore system. Secondarily, the overall
@ Temperature 25% Packer Fluid 50% Packer Fluid 75% Packer Fluid morphology of the pore system, particularly with regard to
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2 pore sizes and the degree of interconnection of open pores, is
Deposition Inhibitor Clear, Compatible Clear, Compatible Clear, Compatible
@ 35F but not miscible but not miscible but not miscible examined. If requested, rock-fluid interactions may be
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2 directly observed with the Environmental Scanning Electron
Deposition Inhibitor Clear, Compatible Clear, Compatible Clear, Compatible
@ 70F but not miscible but not miscible but not miscible
Microscope.
11.5 ppg Packer Fluid #2 While XRD analysis proved quantitative information about
Deposition Inhibitor Emulsion Formed in Emulsion Formed in Emulsion Formed in
@ 180F Organic Layer Organic Layer Organic Layer the amount of potentially sensitive formation clays and
1
Packer Fluid #2 was 11.5 ppg Sodium Bromide containing 25% LMWA minerals, ESEM analysis provided the all-important
2
Paraffin / Asphaltene controller / inhibitor
SPE 103209 5

information about where those potentially sensitive clays on a glass slide with clear epoxy. Chips are trimmed and
and mineral were located within the formation. When located reduced in thickness to 30 microns.
in the pore channels and throats, formation damage is more Thin section analysis provided detailed information about
likely to occur. Scanning Electron Micrographs are presented how formation grains are contacted and positioned with
in Figure 2 and Figure 3. respect to other grains, and how the grains might be cemented
one to another. A representative Thin Section Image is shown
Table 6. X-ray Diffraction Analysis in Figure 4.

Silt/ 1A 1B Lower 2
Mineral Phases
Shale Sand Sand Shale Sand
Quartz (SiO2) 52 85 75 15 81
Plagioclase
2 4 7 2 6
Feldspar
Potassium Feldspar trace 3 2 trace 2
Calcite (CaCO3) 4 --- trace 12 ---
Fe-Dolomite
Siderite (FeCO3)
1
1
---
---
---
1
1
7
1
---
IS
Halite (NaCl)
Clinoptilolite
---
---
---
1
---
6
---
---
1
---
Q
Amphibole --- trace 2 --- ---
Mica + Illite 2 1 1 3 trace
Kaolinite 2 --- trace 3 trace
Chlorite --- trace --- --- ---
* Mixed-Layer 35 5 56 8
5 (40)
Illite/Smectite (35) (50) (40) (55)
Figure 3: Scanning electron micrograph illustrating the pore
* The number in parentheses is the approximate percentage of system morphology of the 2 sand. Quartz (Q) is the principal
smectite in the mixed-layer illite/smectite clay grain. Much of the grain coating material is illite-smectite (IS).
Note that illite-smectite is more abundant in this sample than in
the 1-A sand sample. The sand is poorly sorted and fine grained.
Original magnification = 120x.

IS

Q
Z

Figure 2: Scanning electron micrograph illustrating grain-to-grain


contacts and the pore system morphology of the 1-A sand.
Quartz (Q) is the principal grain. Much of the grain coating
material is clinoptilolite (Z). Grains are also coated by illite-
smectite (IS). Original magnification = 150x. Figure 4: Thin section image illustrating grain-to-grain contacts
and the pore system morphology of the 1-B sand. Quartz (white)
is the principal grain. Very fine-grained, clear material in the pore
Thin Section Examination (TS) system is clinoptilolite. Dark colored grains are lithic fragments
Thin sections are prepared of portions of samples for and altered feldspars. The sand is poorly sorted and fine grained.
examination with the petrographic microscope. The Original magnification = 90x.
examination of thin sections of rock chips is useful in
determining grain-to-grain contacts and the distribution and Capillary Suction Time (CST) Testing
nature (cement or grains) of carbonate minerals. Prior to CST testing is utilized to determine the sensitivity of rock
preparation, samples are cleaned with toluene to remove samples to potential base fluids for completion systems. The
residual contamination created by drilling the plugs. Samples technique provides relative numbers useful for comparing
are impregnated with blue dyed epoxy resin to better define fluids. Water sensitivity and clay swelling control are tested
porosity. One surface of each plug is ground flat and mounted for water-based fluids. The test gives the time of movement of
a water-front between two electrodes, which is related to the
6 SPE 103209

ability of the fluid to flocculate or disperse clays in the but its importance for successful completion in a deepwater
sample. For comparing different samples in the same fluid, a environment cannot be overstated.
longer time of water-front movement indicates greater water
sensitivity of the sample (greater dispersion). For comparing Coreflow Procedure Gas Productive Zones
the same sample in different fluids, a longer time of liquid- Plugs are seated in rubber sleeves at 1500 psi confining
front movement indicates poorer clay control by the fluid pressure (or customer defined pressure) and then pressure and
(greater dispersion). Note that this technique is not applicable flow-saturated with filtered formation water. If formation
to organic fluids. water is not available, a laboratory prepared formation brine is
Portions of core material from two different depths were used. This procedure ensures that all test cores used in
tested (one in the cleaner section and one with more clay comparative testing are at the same (or very similar) initial
content) and the results from Capillary Suction Time testing water-wet state prior to treatment with the test fluid. Prior to
are given in Table 7. Clearly indicated, the addition of flow, systems are heated to the reservoir temperature.
potassium chloride enhanced the inhibition characteristics of Flow is established in an arbitrary direction to wellbore
the various brine fluids tested and resulted in favorable (production) direction with humidified nitrogen gas to steady
capillary suction times. These results complimented the state permeability. A gas flow meter is placed in line, ahead
mineralogical results found above. of the humidifier. Data collection is automated. Cores are
then treated with the test fluid. If a cross-linked fracturing
Table 7. Capillary Suction Time Testing fluid is tested, a prepad is injected before the main fracturing
fluid. Cross-linked fracturing fluids are injected by cross face
Normalized Migration Time, flow. Effluent fluids are collected for 36 minutes so that fluid
Fluid Seconds loss parameters (wall building coefficient and spurt) can be
Silt/Shale Shale calculated. Fracturing fluids are shut-in to break. A post flush
Tap Water 831 1052.3 of the pad fluid is used after the fracturing fluid has broken.
3% KCl 28.8 44.4 Note that all test fluids are injected in a direction opposite to
7% KCl 13.7 25 that direction in which the initial permeability was established.
12% KCl 11.3 19.3 Final fluids are displaced from the core with humidified
11# Na/Br 22.9 41.1 nitrogen gas. Flow is re-established in the production
15.4 Cs/K Formate 215.1 342.8 direction with humidified nitrogen gas to steady state.
15.4 Cs/K Formate 159.5 331.6
15.4 Cs/K Formate Flow Procedure Oil Productive Zones
131.7 247.2 Prior to analysis, formation core plugs are seated in rubber
Lower pH
sleeves and subjected to 1500 psi confining pressure (or
15.4 Zinc-Based 125.5 222.4
customer defined pressure). Cores are then flow-saturated
15.6 Zinc-Based 160.2 467.2
with filtered formation brine (or lab prepared formation brine)
3% KCl 15.6 Zinc-Based 144.9 345.8
to ensure that the sandstone cores are in similar initial water-
7% KCl 15.6 Zinc-Based 160.0 342.5 wet state prior to treatment. Systems are then heated to the
11# E.G. / NaBr 63.8 108.5 reservoir temperature.
11# Na/K Formate 42.2 61.7 Flow is established in an arbitrary production direction
with standard laboratory oil to steady state permeability. If
Coreflow Analysis available, the viscosity of the natural oil is matched. Natural
Residual hydrocarbon and other contaminants are removed formation oil typically is not used in this type of testing due to
from newly drilled or submitted plugs, using the toluene vapor the potential for precipitation of wax and/or asphaltenes.
extraction technique. In this technique, extraction is continued After a steady state initial permeability is achieved, formation
until fluid in contact with cores is colorless. Fluids are further cores are treated with the test fluid.
stripped from the pore system by methanol extraction. After All test fluids are injected in a direction opposite to that
cleaning, plugs are dried at 150 F for 16 hours. Suction is direction in which the initial permeability is established.
applied to plug surfaces to remove residual fines (generated by Final fluids are displaced from the core with an ammonium
trimming plugs) from surface pores. Porosities are determined chloride solution. Flow is re-established in the production
using a dual cell Boyle's Law porosimeter and helium gas, and direction with standard test oil to steady state.
baseline permeabilities are established for plugs relative to dry For the current project, the time between cutting the cores
nitrogen gas. These tests are generally conducted at ambient and start of the completion process was extremely short such
temperature and 250 psi confining pressure. To better that the fresh state cores were tested as received. Note that
simulate reservoir conditions, nitrogen permeabilities may be the mineralogical samples were cleaned prior to those
determined at reservoir temperature and high confining evaluations.
pressure. Because testing was to be performed on native state Core flow testing results are presented in Table 8 and
cores, baseline porosities and permeabilities were not illustrated in Figures 5 and 6 for the routine core flow testing
determined. with completion brine, and in Figures 7 and 8 for the core flow
Core flow analyses have been routinely conducted for testing with frac fluids. For these dynamic fluid loss type
many years for all types of wells. This is not a new technique, tests, the fluid is pressured into the formation using a cross-
flow configuration.
SPE 103209 7

Table 8. Flow Testing Results,

Sand k to Oil at Swi, md Regain,


Initial Final % Test Fluid
1-A 108 102 94.4 ZnBr2/CaCl2 +
3% KCl + C.P.
(Corrosion Package)
1-B 49 46 93.9 ZnBr2/CaCl2 +
3% KCl + C. P.
1-B 47.0 42.5 90.4 Frac Pack
1-B 96.0 80.5 83.9 Frac Pack
1-B 92.2 73.4 79.6 Field Sequential

Figure 7: Regain permeability test for 1-B sand with the proposed
fracturing fluid is illustrated. The regain permeability is >90%,
indicating that minimal damage occurs from rock/fluid contact.

Figure 5: Regain permeability test for 1-A sand with the proposed
completion brine package is illustrated. The regain permeability
is >94%, indicating that the fluid is virtually non-damaging to the
sandstone.
Figure 8: Regain permeability test for 1-B sand with the proposed
fracturing fluid is illustrated. The regain permeability is 84%,
indicating that minimal damage will result from rock/fluid contact.

Discussion of Results
Deepwater Well Parameters and Conditions
This deepwater well is located Offshore, Gulf of Mexico, in
1,345 feet of water and is expected to produce copious
amounts of oil and high-pressure gas. Bottom hole
temperature is 183F. Because of the 40F mud-line
temperature and water depth, two design criteria were
established for the completion brine and packer fluid; namely,
these fluids must possess a 35F PCT @ 10,000 psi and
hydrate inhibition at 38F to 9,200 psi, with brief transients to
12,000 psi during BOP testing. As described in the
Figure 6: Regain permeability test for 1-B sand with the proposed appropriate sections above, the selected 15.6 ppg zinc-based
completion brine package is illustrated. The regain permeability working brine (containing potassium chloride) and the
is 94%, indicating that the fluid is virtually non-damaging to the
selected 11.5 ppg sodium bromide packer fluid #2 (containing
sandstone.
25% LMWA) amply qualified to meet both PCT and gas
hydrate inhibition requirements. In fact, both fluids surpass
the stated requirements. For example, data illustrated in
Figure 1 clearly indicates that the selected fluid, Packer Fluid
II, exceeds the established 38F at 12,000 psi upper boundary.
8 SPE 103209

Both the PCT and hydrate inhibition issues are crucially Lesson learned an accurate water analysis is crucial for
important to deepwater projects. New testing and evaluation reliable compatibility testing with synthetic formation brine.
methods associated with these parameters have been Careful and timely pH measurement and accurate assessment
developed and are essential new testing paradigms associated of bicarbonates is important.
with deepwater.
In addition to qualifying for the low temperature high The precipitation was most likely due to the high levels of
pressure criteria dictated by well conditions, the high density calcium and magnesium (and barium & strontium), and
zinc-based brine qualified from a metallurgical perspective, chloride in the formation water. Formate salts of magnesium,
having no impact on the chrome tubulars and very low calcium, strontium and barium have limited solubility in water
corrosion towards the casing steel. The sodium bromide and nearly saturated salt systems; and the least soluble of all
packer fluid had been qualified previously. While routine the potassium salts would be potassium chloride, which would
weight loss corrosion has been a widely used for a long time, potentially form when the formation water mixes with the
C-ring testing of actual tubulars for a specific project has cesium/potassium formate brine. The double-edged sword of
become the new additional paradigm for evaluating the very high solubility of cesium.
completion brine for deepwater applications. In contrast, the 15.6 ppg zinc-based completion brine was
found to be completely compatible with both the synthetic
Formation Water Completion Brine Compatibility water and formation water at all ratios (Table 2).
The amount of formation water available for compatibility Based on these finding, the zinc-based brine was selected
testing with the candidate completion brines and packer fluids for the working completion brine, and the sodium bromide
was extremely limited. Therefore, the bulk of compatibility based fluid was selected as the packer fluid for this project
testing was conducted with synthetic water containing the (after passing other requirements).
principle ingredients found in Table 1. Final qualification Historically, such testing had been done at ambient
testing was conducted with the limited amount of formation conditions or at favorable water/brine ratios such as 95/5 or
water available. 50/50. The advantages of the current paradigm became
Two types of completion brines were candidates for this apparent and is recommended for all deepwater and critical
deepwater project: cesium, potassium and sodium based projects.
formate brines; and zinc, calcium and sodium based bromide
and chloride brines. Compatibility studies were conducted Formation Oil Completion Brine Compatibility
with both systems using synthetic water. When the zinc-based brine was mixed with the formation oil
Three samples of a 15.4 ppg cesium potassium formate at reservoir temperature, a complete break of oil from brine
were presented for water compatibility studies. The first was observed with clean, sharp interface within 15 minutes
sample created significant precipitation when mixed with the (Table 3). In the unlikely event that an emulsion should occur
synthetic water at ambient temperature in all ratios mixed. A during completion operations, an industry standard non-
second sample with less buffer and a lower pH, Optimized emulsifier was also tested at reservoir temperature with
Formulation #1, was submitted and tested at 70 and 180F. fantastic results (Table 3). While the non-emulsifier may not
When tested at 70F, only the 75% Synthetic Water / 25% have been needed, an optimized amount was added on a
Optimized Formulation #1 remained clear, but even this precautionary basis, knowing that the crude oil-in-place may
sample generated precipitates when heated to 180F (Table 2). be different from the sample actually tested.
A third sample of cesium/potassium formate brine was Such testing had been conducted at ambient temperature
received with a different ratio of potassium and cesium salts, and an oil/brine ratio 50/50 for many years. Advantages of the
Optimized Formulation #2. When tested at 70F with the heat-aged procedure are readily apparent, and the improved
synthetic water, similar results were observed, although to a paradigm is recommended for all deepwater and critical
lesser extent (Table 2). However, when heated to 180F, the projects.
mixtures at ratios of 50/50 and 25/75 synthetic water/brine
dissolved to form clear solutions, but the 75/25 water/brine Control Line Fluid Completion Brine Compatibility
mixture generated a significant amount of precipitate (Table Control line fluids were tested with potential packer fluids at
2). temperatures of about 35F (mud-line), 70F, and 180F, the
Cesium/potassium formate brine, Optimized Formulation bottom hole temperature; and the fluid/brine ratios were 75/25,
#2, was tested with the actual formation water, and the results 50/50 and 25/75. This testing regime is more comprehensive
are given in Table 2. When mixed at 70F, only the 25/75 than the simple fluid/fluid tests historically conducted, and is
water/brine ratio remained clear; the other samples contained a the recommended paradigm for testing other wellbore fluids
significant amount of settled solids. When heated to 180F, such as paraffin and asphaltene inhibitors.
no change was observed and the mixtures at ratios of 75/25 As anticipated from the chemistry of these systems, the
and 50/50 water/brine remained contaminated with precipitate. 11.5 ppg sodium bromide packer fluid #2 was completely
Additional work was needed to qualify LCM, acid systems, compatible at all temperatures and in all ratios.
and frac fluids that work with the formate-based brines.
Therefore, the formate-based brine system was not evaluated Organic Deposition Inhibitor (etc) Completion
further given the short time before the completion would Brine Compatibility
begin. For deepwater projects, various fluids are considered for
injection into the production stream. These chemicals might
SPE 103209 9

have negative interaction with other wellbore fluids, and their ESEM examination also indicated the pore system was
compatibility should be known before hand, so that characterized by large, open pores connected through
contingency plans can be formulated well in advance. Testing moderately wide pore throats (Figure 4).
on these fluids is conducted similar to that for control line Five flow tests, one on the 1A sand and four on the 1B
fluids. sand, indicated that minimal damage resulted when the
When the selected organic deposition inhibitor was tested completion brine (Figures 5 & 6) and proposed frac pack fluid
at 35 and 70F, the fluids remained clear and compatible but (Figures 7 & 8) were flowed through these cores. Both the
not miscible. When heated to 180F, the brine layer remained completion brine and the frac fluid were therefore qualified for
essentially clear, but an emulsion formed in the organic layer. use in this deepwater project.
Some small amount of brine may have been incorporated into Acceptable results were obtained from the sequential
the emulsion, but the emulsion remained fluid (Table 5). treatment of one core as it would occur in the field: from
A more complicated picture resulted when similar tests completion brine - to fluid loss control pills (LCM) - to acid
were conducted between the organic deposition inhibitor and cleanup - to frac fluid (Figure 9). These results were however,
the control line fluid, where emulsions were even observed in lower than for the individual core treatments, but within
the brine phase. acceptable range. Results from all flow tests are summarized
in Table 8.
Formation Rock Completion Brine Compatibility
The 150-foot interval consists of an upper silt/shale
interval; two upper sand intervals (1A and 1B); a lower shale
interval; and a lower sandstone interval (2). Sandstones are
poorly to moderately sorted and are fine grained. The
bottomhole temperature is 183 F, and the formation is oil
productive. The goal of examining samples was to determine
appropriate completion brines. The interval had been reported
to be highly sensitive to contact with fresh water and
completely disaggregate in low salinity fluids. These reports
were verified by CST testing, which was initiated to quickly
determine the sensitivity of the silt/shale lithology and the
shale lithology to various fluids.
CST results indicate that both the silt/shale and shale
samples were sensitive to water but less sensitive to
conventional brines. Potassium chloride, KCl, was observed
to have a positive impact in reducing water sensitivity, even
when added to the 15.6 ppg zinc-based brine. Therefore, the
Figure 9: Regain permeability test for 1-B sand with the proposed
zinc-based brine containing the 3% KCl was selected as the sequence of fluids to be applied in the field. The permeability was
working completion brine. Comparative results are presented decreased by the use of the fracturing fluid after the LCM and
in Table 7. acid cleanup.
Water sensitivities of the silt/shale and shale samples were
understandable based on the mineralogical analysis that
indicated these samples contained mixed layer illite-smectite Lessons Learned
clays in amounts from 35 to 56% (Table 6), and of these, 35 to
40% were expandable smectite layers. Lessons learned occurred on two levels. The first involves the
Mineralogical analysis also indicated that mixed layer overall development and evolution of the testing program.
illite-smectite clays were the most abundant clay minerals The selection of the completion and packer fluid should be
found in the sandstone samples, with concentrations ranging based upon the overall completion scheme planned for the
from 5 to 8% (Table 6), and of these, 40 to 55% were project and tested accordingly, and the selection strategy has
expandable smectite layers, indicating that some water to start with an end in mind. Comprehensive testing for
sensitivity was to be expected. In addition, the 1A and 1B deepwater projects requires planning, scheduling, and
sands were found to contain 1 to 6% clinoptilolite, a zeolite coordination. Many individuals with unique skills are
mineral having some acid sensitivity. While not discussed involved and testing must be scheduled into the workload.
herein, acidizing and future acid stimulations would also While many of the tests are not complicated, specialized
impact the selection of the working completion brine and equipment is often required, and complications occur from
packer fluid system. time to time. For one reason or another, such as the rupture of
Furthermore, ESEM examination indicated that the clay a confining core sleeve during a permeability study, some tests
minerals occurred as pore fill, grain coatings, and in may have to be repeated. Comprehensive testing does take
laminations (Figures 2 & 3). The zeolites occurred as grain time, and some tests might require three to four weeks to
coatings (Figure 2), and along with the illite-smectite clays, conduct, plus the set-up, break-down and analysis time.
would easily be contacted by the working completion brine.
Therefore, because the most inhibitive fluids would be
required, KCl was added to the zinc-based completion brine.
10 SPE 103209

The second level involves unexpected results that might be References


obtained, results that go against traditional expectations or
show sensitivity not otherwise expected. 1. API Recommended Practice 13J Testing Heavy Brines, Fourth
Edition, American Petroleum Institute, Dallas, TX, May 2006,
Conclusions page 39.

2. Freeman, Michael A. et al.: High Pressure Crystallization of


1. The best fit-for-purpose fluids were selected - halide brine Deep-Water Completion Brines, paper SPE 58729 presented at
systems: 15.6 ppg zinc-based working brine containing the 2000 SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage,
3% KCl, modified 11.5 ppg sodium bromide packer fluid, Lafayette, LA, 2324 February 2000.
and KCl frac fluid, were qualified based on a
comprehensive suite of tests. 3. Javora, P.H. et al.: A New Technical Standard for Testing Heavy
Brines, paper SPE 98398 presented at the 2006 SPE
2. The paradigm for a deepwater project includes a International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage,
comprehensive suite of testing and evaluation at Lafayette, LA, 15-17 February 2006.
appropriate temperature and pressure conditions:
4. Sloan, E. Dendy Jr.: Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases,
Pressure crystallization of completion brine Second Edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY (1998)
Gas hydrate inhibition 199.
Stress corrosion cracking studies
Brine compatibility with formation water, 5. Pakulski, Marek et al.: Gull of Mexico Deepwater Well
formation oil, control line fluids, and injection Completion with Hydrate Inhibitors, paper SPE 92971
fluids presented at the 2005 SPE International Symposium on Oilfield
Chemistry, Houston, TX, 24 February 2005.
Brine compatibility with formation rock,
including XRD, ESEM, thin section, CST, and 6. Javora, P.H. et al.: Effective High Density Wellbore Cleaning
core flow testing. Fluids: Brine-Based and Solids-Free, paper IADC/SPE 99158
presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami,
3. Planning, coordinating and scheduling required tests, Florida, 21-23 February 2006.
tasks and results is a key element for the deepwater
paradigm, and do take time. 7. Berry, S.B.: Optimization of Synthetic-Based and Oil-Based
Mud Displacements With An Emulsion-Based Displacement
4. Shale and silt/shale boundaries isolating productive zones Spacer System, paper SPE 95273 presented at the 2005 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX 9-12
were determined to be extremely water sensitive by CST
October 2005.
and mineralogical studies. These results were used to
infer potential sensitivities for the layered reservoir with
8. Ali, S.A.; Javora, P.H.; Guenard, J.H.; Kitziger, F.W.;
shale laminations. KCl was therefore added to the 15.6
Test High Density Brines for Formation Water
ppg zinc-based completion brine.
Interaction, Petroleum Engineer International, July 1994,
31-37.
5. Clay swelling was controlled by the 15.6 ppg zinc-based
completion brine and KCl frac fluid, as indicated by the 9. Ezzat, A.M.: Completion Fluids Design and Current Technology
results from mineralogical evaluation, CST testing, and Weaknesses, paper SPE 19434 presented at the SPE Formation
core flow testing. Damage Control Symposium, Lafayette, LA, 22-23 February
1990.
6. The project was completed successfully, on time, on
budget, and met the deliverability requirements. 10. ISO 132503-3 Testing of heavy brines, 1st edition, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2005).

11. Stevens, R., Ke, M., Javora, P. & Qu, Q.: Oilfield Environment-
Acknowledgements Induced Stress Corrosion Cracking of CRAs in Completion
The authors thank Noble Energy and BJ Services for Brines, paper SPE 90188 presented at the SPE Annual
permission to publish this work. Special appreciation is given Technical Conferences and Exhibition, Houston, TX, 26-29
to Jennifer Cutler, Dr. Gerald Braun, Brian Davis, Stephanie September 2004.
Heard and Anne Ortego, BJ Services Company, for the
laboratory contributions provided for this paper. 12. Ke, M., Javora, P., & Qu, Q.: Application of pH Buffer as
Corrosion Inhibitor in NaBr Brine Packer Fluids at High
Metric Conversion Factors Temperatures, paper presented at the 1st International
Symposium on Oilfield Corrosion, Aberdeen, UK, 28 May
F (F-32) x 5 / 9 = C
2004.
Lb/gal x 1.198 26 E+02 = kg/m3
psi x 6.894 76 E+00 = kPa

You might also like