Effect of sand production on the productivity of oil wells in unconsolidated sandstone reservoirs in Sirte basin Libya (field case

study)
Mohamed S. Nasr and Said M. Edbieb Sand production is one of the major challenges that facing the petroleum industry in completing and producing oil and gas wells. The production of sand from such wells causes wear to surface and subsurface well equipment as well as reducing the oil well productivity. These problems can result in a great effect on the wells production cost. Sand production is usually associated with Pilocene and younger Tertiary age sediments and production of sand is expected from wells completed in the unconsolidated reservoirs of these sediments. There are many chronic and troublesome sand production areas in different oil basins in the world. These areas include US gulf coast, California, Indonesia, Nigeria, Trinidad, Venezuela, and Libya. Although most of formation sand problems occur in younger sediments, failure may also occur in older formations when in-situ rock strength is reduced by poor completion and production practices. The objectives of this study are: 1) To investigate the effect of the completion (perforation) techniques as well as the bottom hole flowing pressure in controlling sand production from unconsolidated sandstone reservoirs in Sirte basin Libya. 2) To study the effect of sand production and the gravel pack on the oil productivity from sand producing wells. This study is conducted by comparing the oil flow rates from wells before and after the start of sand production. An investigation is also conducted by comparing the oil flow rate of wells producing sand with different perforation completion techniques. The data utilized in this study is collected from wells producing under natural flow and under gas lift producing mechanism for different flow periods. The producing data also was collected for producing wells under open hole completion and under different perforating completion patterns and techniques. The data is analyzed by constructing plots of oil flow rate as well as water cut and gas oil liquid ratio versus producing time. The results of the analysis indicate that the sand production was observed in wells that produce with gas lift mechanism compared to natural flow wells in the same field. High reduction in wellbore pressure causes sand consolidation to be weakened and therefore sand grains are separated from each other. The movement of sand grains in the wellbore causes a stable emulsion of oil and water mixed with sand in the wellbore resulting in great reduction in the oil effective permeability and hence decreasing the oil well productivity. It is also observed that wells completed with higher perforation densities
19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 1

over long perforation intervals required less sand production cleanouts during longer periods of production. It is therefore concluded that sand production causes great reduction in overall well productivity and hence reduces the oil recovery factor in the studied reservoirs. Introduction Sand production is one of the major challenges that facing the petroleum industry in many oil field in Libya. The production of formation sand into a well from unconsolidated sandstone is one of the oldest problems plaguing the oil and gas industry, because of its adverse effects on well productivity and equipment. The history of sand production dates back to the 1900s with the completion of water wells with sand control installations. The sand problems are normally associated with shallow geological formations that have little or no natural cementation to hold the individual sand grains together, but in some areas the sand problems may be encountered in high depths.1 The production of formation fluids will probably be associated with the production of formation sand as a result, when the wellbore pressure is lower than reservoir pressure, drag forces are applied to the formation sand as a consequence of fluid production. If the formation's restraining forces are exceeded, sand will be drawn into the wellbore. In some situations, small quantities of formation sand can be produced with no significant adverse effects; however, in most cases, sand production leads to reduced productivity and/or excessive maintenance to both downhole and surface equipment. Sufficient sand production may also cause premature failure of the wellbore and well equipment. Several sand prediction models have been developed to predict the onset of sand and the amount and rate of sand production. More efficient and advanced sand control installations have been put into wells to stop sand from moving into the wellbore and filling the hole sand up2. Controlling formation sand is costly and usually involves either slowing the production rate or using gravel-packing or sand consolidation techniques. Well completion practices are a critical consideration in zones where there is probability for sand production. Sand management has been identified as one of the key issues in field development in over 70% of the worlds oil and gas fields. Sand management is not just about selection of sand control systems, it is about maximizing and maintaining production while managing sand at acceptable rates. Operators spend millions of dollars each year to prevent the production of formation sand and to deal with other sand related problems. Expenditures of this magnitude obviously have a significant impact on profits. In spite of these costs, effective sand-control practices have yielded oil and gas from wells that otherwise would have been shut- in.3

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 2

In considering sand control or formation solids control, one must differentiate between load-bearing solids and the fine particles (fines) that are not usually a part of the mechanical structure of the formation. Some fines are probably always produced with the well fluids, which in fact, are beneficial, if fines move freely through the gravel pack, they will not plug it, and thus, sand control actually refers to the control of the loadbearing particles, those that support the overburden. The critical factor to assessing the risk of sand production from a particular well is whether or not the production of load bearing particles can be maintained below an acceptable level at the anticipated flow rates and producing conditions which will make the well production acceptable.4,5 Opposing the fluid forces are the resulting forces that act to hold sand grains in place. These forces arise from intergranular bonds ( natural consolidation), intergranular friction, a gravity forces and capillary forces. Internal pore pressure (reservoir pressure) helps support the weight of the overburden, thereby acting to relieve some of the stress on the sand grain. Of these forces, the intergranular bonds are the most important factor in preventing sand production. The compressive strength of formation sand is probably the best measure of the intergranular bond.6 If good completion and production practices are followed, formation with a compressive strength exceeding 1000 psi will generally produce sand free. The exception is the case where the pressure drawdown around the well is high. If the pressure drawdown is low, however, sands with much lower compressive strength may also produce sand free. If an oil well is produced at a desired production rate which causes the well flowing pressure to be lower than formation collapse pressure, the formation consolidation breaks down, and sand tends to move toward the wellbore.7,8 Discussion of the results The bottom hole flowing pressure and the corresponding oil flow rate was measured for wells producing sand in the time period when the wells were not producing sand and in later times when the wells started to produce sand. The data was collected form two giant sandstone reservoirs in Sirte basin Libya. This measured data was utilized for the construction of the inflow performance curves for the studied wells. The inflow performance curve was used as a measure of the effect of the sand production on the productivity of the well. The first reservoir is located in the South Eastern part of the basin was discovered in November 1961 experienced no production of sand from the wells for long time. As the reservoir pressure declined in some parts of the reservoir some of the wells in the pressure sink area started to produce sand. In recent years the sand production was the mean cause of shut-in of some of the wells in the field. The productive formation is a generic term for a group of formations of Nubian, Nubian Triassic and pre-Mesozoic age.

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 3

The reservoir has historically been sub-divided into five major formations, referred to as unit V, IV, III, II and I, in order of increasing age, all of which are present in the reservoir. These formations are present in two adjacent reservoirs. These reservoirs are sealed by the group shales, which are the main regional source rock. The upper sealing rock also includes some carbonate zones as well as a few sand stringers, which may contain a significant oil volume. The average depth of the wells is 9530 ft and the underlaid water oil contact is at a depth of 13260 ft. The reservoir was produced under natural depletion, with only partial replacement of withdrawals by edge-water aquifers. Most of the wells are on gas-lift, with a few having ESPs. Figures 1, 2 and 3 are constructed from the inflow performance before and after the gravel packing treatment for wells Y1, Y2 and Y3 which are producing with high oil API gravity and producing with different water cuts and producing under gas lift mechanism. Well Y1 produces with low water cuts where wells Y2 and Y3 produce with high water cuts. It is observed that the inflow performance after gravel packing was not greatly affected by the water cut, and the effect was approximately the same for high and low water cut wells. These wells produce under gas lift artificial lift mechanism which believed not to affect the gravel pack in the bottom of the well. The other giant oil field is located in the South of Sirte Basin Libya, was discovered in October 1961. The primary zone of interest is the Oligocene. The reservoir development started early after first discovery in 1961 when the well X-1 tested commercial oil production. The oil inflow performance of this well is illustrated in figure 4. The field started commercial production in October 1964 from one giant sandstone reservoir which was developed to produce under the mechanism of natural bottom water drive. Field development has continued since its discovery, a total of 127 wells with average well spacing 147 acres have been drilled and completed, and the productive area of the reservoir about 16,768 acres. Presently, most wells are being produced by ESP. As of December 31st 2008 the field average oil production rate was 24691 BOPD, with 27.4% WC. It is observed that the oil flow performance of this well was greatly affected by the high water cut experienced in the well as well as the producing lifting mechanism which is ESP. It is therefore concluded that the stability of the gravel pack in the bottom of the well is very sensitive to the turbulent flow condition in the borehole caused by ESP. This well produces with low oil API gravity which makes easy for the heavy oil to form emulsions with the produced water in the presence of the formation sand in the wellbore.

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 4

P 1850

Figure (1) illustrates the effect of gravel packing on well Y-1 performance producing with low water cut and high API gravity and producing with gas lift mechanism.

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 5

Figure (2): illustrates the effect of gravel packing on well Y-2 performance producing with moderate water cut and high API gravity and producing with gas lift mechanism.

1850

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 6

Figure (3): illustrates the effect of gravel packing on well Y-3 performance producing with high water cut and high API gravity and producing with gas lift mechanism.

Figure (4): illustrates the effect of gravel packing on well X-1 performance producing with high water cut and high API gravity and producing with ESP mechanism. Conclusions

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 7

1. Older sediments tend to be more consolidated than newer sediments. This indicates that sand production is normally a problem when producing from shallow formations, so the degree of consolidation can be considered one of many reasons of sand production. 2. The pressure in the reservoir supports some of the weight of the overlying rock, lowering the reservoir pressure creates an increasing amount of stress on the formation sand itself, the formation sand grains may be crushed, creating fines that are produced along with the well fluids. 3. It is observed that the sand production has increased or begins as water begins to be produced or as water cut increases. 4. The frictional drag force exerted on the formation sand grains is created by the flow of reservoir fluid due to high viscosity (8.62 cp). High reservoir fluid viscosity would apply a greater frictional drag force to the formation sand grains and in turn sand started to move. References 1. Adams.N, Recommended Practices for Testing Sand Used in Gravel Packing Operations, American Petroleum Institute, API Recommended Practice 58 (RP58), March 1986. 2. Cocales, B., Optimizing Materials for Better Gravel Packs, World Oil (December 1992), 73-77. 3. Coberly, C.J., Selection of Screen Openings for Unconsolidated Sands, API Drilling and Production Practice, 1941. 4. Gurley, D., Copeland, C., and Hendrick Jr., J., Design, Plan, and Execution of GravelPack Operations for Maximum Productivity, Journal of Petroleum Technology, October 1977, 1259-1266. 5. Penberthy, W.L. and Echols, E.E., Gravel Placement in Wells, SPE Paper 22793, Journal of Petroleum Technology (July 1993), 612-613, 670-674. 6. Penberthy, W.L. and Shaughnessy, C.M., Sand Control, SPE Series on Special Topics, Volume 1, 1992. 7. Sanfilippo F., Brignoli M., Giacca D. and Santarelli.F. Sand Production from Prediction to Management 1997. 8.Suman, G.O. Jr., Ellis, R.C., and Snyder, R.E., Sand Control Handbook, Second Edition, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, 1991.

19th Annual India Oil & Gas Review Summit & International Exhibition

Page 8