SPE-176100-MS

Relative Permeability Modifier (RPM) as Chemical Diverter in Bullhead

Matrix Acidizing Treatment
M. Salman Hayatullah, and Raihan Ridwan, BOB PT. BSP—Pertamina Hulu; Lisa Meifresia, Hafidz Kurniawan,
and Benni Hermanto Napitupulu, Halliburton

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IATMI Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, 20 –22 October 2015.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Matrix acidizing treatments are widely used for stimulating oil producing wells in the Zamrud field
because of damage caused by scale plugging. The success of this matrix acidizing treatment depends on
the uniform distribution of the treating fluid over the entire hydrocarbon-producing zone (Hill et al. 1994).
Most oil producing wells are not homogeneous and contain sections of varying permeability—when fluids
are pumped into a well, they naturally tend to flow into the zone with the highest permeability or less
damage (Eoff et al. 2004). Being able to completely acidize the interval is a major problem.
Historically, mechanical techniques using packers has been employed by this operator to control the
placement of acid fluid into the wellbore. One of the greatest challenges is that, although mechanical
techniques are very effective, they are more time consuming than chemical techniques. Mechanical
techniques divert treatment fluids from the wellbore; however, there is no control once the fluid enters the
formation. On average, from four wells that were acidized using mechanical techniques, the post
production performance was not satisfying—no production increase.
For many years, relative permeability modifiers (RPMs) have received a great deal of attention from
the oil and gas industry. RPMs offer the option of bullheading an acid treatment without zonal isolation,
and they are also designed to decrease water production with little or no decrease in oil or gas production.
It is a solids-free diverter, opposed to the plugging mechanism of typical particulate diverters; it can be
used for sandstone and carbonate formations with temperatures of 80 to 350°F and a permeability of
approximately 6 darcys. The RPM system is placed in alternating stage(s) with the acid throughout the
entire treatment. The first stage containing RPM predominantly will enter the most permeable area; it will
change the effective permeability of the zones where it is adsorbed, diverting the following acid stage(s)
to other zones or sections of the rock. Furthermore, in rock containing significant proportions of
sandstone-type lithology, the water permeability of the treated zone is decreased permanently, resulting
in post-treatment reduced water production from the treated zone. This paper discusses the geological and
reservoir parameters of the wells, job design consideration, and post acidizing results when using RPM
as a chemical diversion technique. Field results show significant improvement of post-stimulation
production after combined acid with RPM systems were implemented in comparison to offset wells
acidized with mechanical techniques in the same reservoir and at the same level.
2 SPE-176100-MS

Introduction
Sandstone matrix acidizing is a process aimed at enhancing the formation permeability in the vicinity of
the wellbore by dissolving some formation material with a mixture of hydrochloric acid or increasing well
productivity by reducing the skin factor. The skin factor can be reduced if near-wellbore (NWB) damage
is removed or if a highly conductive structure is superimposed onto the formation. The result is a net
increase in the productivity index, which can be used either to increase the production rate or to decrease
the drawdown pressure differential.
Successful acid stimulation involves a method for diverting acid across the entire hydrocarbon-
producing zone. Because most producing wells are not homogeneous and contain sections of varying
permeability, being able to completely acidize the interval is a major problem (Eoff et al. 2004).
In attempts to achieve uniform placement of acid across all layers, various placement techniques have
been widely used (Eoff et al. 2004). The most reliable method uses mechanical isolation devices, such as
packers. The packer allows acid to be injected into small intervals, one by one, until the entire zone has
been treated. However, this method is not often practical or applicable. More importantly, mechanical
means diverts treatment fluids from the wellbore; however, there is no control once the fluid enters the
formation. Without a packer, a diverting agent must be used to reduce flow into nonproductive or
undamaged zones and redirect this flow to zones in greater need of damage removal. Typical diverting
agents include ball sealers, degradable particulates, viscous fluid, and foams (Eoff et al. 2004), none of
which address the problem of increased water production that often follows acid treatments. Therefore, it
would be a major advantage to have a material that could inherently decrease the formation permeability
to water while also providing diversion.
RPMs can be simply described as one method for controlling water production using dilute polymer
solutions to decrease the effective permeability to water more than to oil (Eoff et al. 2004). Because of
the unique nature of the polymer, it is successfully used both as an RPM and as a diverter. As a diverter,
the fluid predominantly enters the most permeable section of the interval (generally the water-bearing
strata). Once absorbed, the presence of the RPM polymer significantly reduces the effective permeability
of the interval to aqueous-based fluids. Hence, the aqueous-based fluid is diverted to less-permeable
zones, causing acid flow to be diverted from undamaged or high-permeability intervals to damaged or
lower-permeability intervals.
The cases presented in this paper discuss field results related to significant improvements of post-
stimulation production after the combined acid with polymer as RPM and diverter were implemented in
comparison to offset wells acidized with mechanical techniques in the same reservoir and at the same
level.

Data and Method

Acidizing Bullhead Feasibility
Bullhead systems offer treatments that do not require zonal isolation and are designed to reduce water
production with little or no reduction in oil or gas production (Eoff et al. 2003). The primary challenge
in these acidizing bullhead treatments is to achieve uniform damage removal so that the original flow
distribution across the treated interval can be altered to provide generally equal acid distribution. Also,
post production after acid treatment is in place is another point to be reviewed, which usually involves
higher water cut.
RPM Properties
The oil industry has used permeability modifiers since the 1970s. They have been primarily used to
reduce water production from water-fingering, water coning, early water breakthrough in water-injection
reservoirs, and water coming from high-permeability streaks.
SPE-176100-MS 3

One great advantage of using RPMs to reduce water production is that they only decrease the relative
permeability to water, with little to no effect on the relative permeability to hydrocarbon (Nieves et al.
2002; Eoff et al. 2003 and 2004; Farrera et al. 2006).
The RPM used in the bullhead acidizing has certain advantages compared to other RPMs that have
been introduced previously within the industry. Primarily, it is a water-soluble polymer combined with
water-insoluble alkyl chains (retaining the overall water solubility), otherwise known as a hydrophobically
modified polymer (Nieves et al. 2002; Eoff et al. 2003).
A hydrophobic modification is a water-soluble polymer with small groups attached that are not water
soluble. Because only a few of these groups are attached, the polymer is still soluble in water (Eoff et al.
2003). However, because these groups are hydrophobic, they tend to attract one another and repel water
molecules. This could almost be called a crosslinking mechanism, although it is a weak association. This
is why a hydrophobically modified polymer has increased solution viscosity. This weak association also
leads to increased levels of adsorption. With the hydrophobically modified polymer, the hydrophobic
associations cause more polymer to adsorb, and this is why higher levels of water-permeability reduction
occur with this polymer. This polymer, once pumped into the formation, instantly adheres to the formation
grains and begins to work immediately. Incorporating this chemical in alternating stages with the acid
throughout the entire treatment helps stimulate marginal reservoirs, where the possibility of the subse-
quent acid stage being diverted to other zones increases. This technique yields good results. The
mechanism of permeability reduction is based on the restriction of the water-flow path in the matrix of
rock without harming effective oil permeability (Fig. 1).

Figure 1—RPM treatment effects

RPM Properties
Candidate well selection was based on the following criteria:
● Temperature 80 to 350°F
● Lithology sandstone or carbonate permeability approximately 6 darcys

Results and Discussion

There were three wells acidized using RPM as a diverter. Most of these wells have permeabilities ranging
from 10 to 800 md. Although the RPM is a solids-free diverter, some concern exists when applying this
system to low permeability formation because of the way RPM attaches to the rock, which could cause
a reduced oil flow path and flow rate after stimulation. Results from one well that had low permeability
formation presented in this paper illustrates that the RPM can be applied with success in these situations.
4 SPE-176100-MS

Case 1: Zamrud 154

Having identified the need for acidizing in the reservoir at 2,830, 2,900, 2,970, and 3,050 ft, scale damage
was removed for better production; the next challenge was to help ensure targeted hydrocarbon-producing
zones were selectively acidized relative to water-producing zones. Also, post production after the acid
treatment in place was another point to be reviewed, which usually has higher water cut. Candidate wells,
Zamrud 167 and Zamrud 153, were chosen as test cases for acidizing. Solvent and acid treatments at 38
bbl solvent and 62 bbl of acid were designed for Well Zamrud 167. While, for Well Zamrud 153, acid
treatment at a volume of 73 bbl was designed to be pumped. In Well Zamrud 167, the well produced
without oil production increase at 35% water cut. Whereas, in Well Zamrud 153, water cut increased from
60 to 80% without any increase to oil production shown in the post-acid test. The results were, of course,
disappointing (Figs. 2 and 3).

Figure 2—Zamrud 167 oil production and water cut

SPE-176100-MS 5

Figure 3—Zamrud 153 oil production and water cut

Based on a review by the operator, there was a need for a technique that could control the water
production after an acid treatment, without sacrificing oil production so as not to miss the oil.
One of the solutions that seemed feasible at that time was using RPMs in acidizing. The RPM in
acidizing treatment was designed by first choosing the RPM concentration and the technique for its
placement. For this particular well design, the RPM fluid was pumped in alternating stages of acid and
diverter throughout the entire treatment with the same injection rate as the acid treatment. However, for
the first RPM acidizing treatment job pumped in this area, the best idea still might be to start with a
volume of RPM treatment equal to the acid volume and pump the treatment in stages. Because the first
fluid pumped will enter the most permeable zone, less acid should be used in this stage. Most of the acid
should be used in subsequent stages to treat the lower permeability zones (Table 1).

Table 1—Diverter service suggested treatment volumes

Treatment Process Stage No. Total Volume (%)

Two-stage 1 30
2 70
Three-stage 1 15
2 35
3 50
Four-stage 1 5
2 15
3 30
4 50

Well Zamrud 154 was selected as the first well in the area to meet the candidate criteria for matrix
acidizing with RPM as a chemical diverter. This well has an average porosity of 19%. It has four target
6 SPE-176100-MS

intervals from different formations. Production had decreased because of damage scale plugging, with SI
(Stiff-Davis) of 2.86 shown in Table 2 in the water analysis result. The well temperature was 230°F with
an average permeability of 100 md.

Table 2—Water analysis for Well Zamrud 154

Temp of Resistivity SI
Reservoir Naⴙ Caⴙⴙ Mg ⴙⴙ CO3ⴝ HCO3- SO4ⴝ Cl- at 89.6°F Salinity (Stiff-
(F) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (Ohm-meters) (°/ⴥ) pH Davis) Porosity

239 1811.6 16.2 10.8 100.0 310.0 0.0 4098.7 1.0 5.7 9.1 2.86 24.7%

The recommended treatment was 1,200 gal of 15% HCl acid system with 1,200 gal of RPM (80.4 ppm
solution in filtered salt water at an adjusted pH of 5 to 6.5). Displacement used 40 bbl filtered salt water.
The polymer solution was premixed in the water tanks.
Salt water was used to help prevent freshwater shock to most formations and the resulting migration
of nonswelling clay minerals (illite). A surfactant was also used in the preflush to improve polymer
penetration. It was hypothesized that the surfactant temporarily adsorbs onto the rock sites where the
polymer would ordinarily attach.
Before pumping for acid and RPM treatment began, injection testing was performed by pumping salt
water with a small concentration of surfactant. Maximum surface pressure allowed during the job was
1,200 psi to keep treating pressures below the formation fracture gradient. The acid and RPM treatment
was bullheaded into the zone, using the rig pump. The pumping rate achieved during penetrating of RPM
into formation was 0.5 bbl/min.
The job was pumped and reduced the water cut to 52%, initially raising total production from 52 to 125
BOPD. During that time, the production stabilized and the water cut eventually decreased to 32%. This
was a tremendous improvement in terms of the producing capability at the 2,830, 2,900, 2,970, and 3,050
ft reservoir depths, primarily compared to Well Zamrud 167, which produced and even reached 100%
water cut (Figs. 4 and 5).
SPE-176100-MS 7

Figure 4 —Zamrud 154 formation 2,830, 2,900, 2,970, and 3,050 ft depth log interpretation

Figure 5—Zamrud 154 oil production and water cut

8 SPE-176100-MS

Case 2: Bungsu 11
South East Beruk 03 was acidized with 5 bbl of regular acid and 3 bbl of solvent. The well produced with
no production increase at 100% water cut, just as before the treatment (Fig. 6).

Figure 6 —South East Beruk 03 oil production and water cut

Well Bungsu 11 was overlooked by the operator because the well has similar problems, such as
production decline attributed to scale problem and the well economics. Based on job results/experience
in Well Zamrud 154, using this particular well treatment design, the acidizing treatment incorporates the
RPM treatment volume and was designed equal to 30% of the acid volume for permeabilities less than 500
md. The acid treatment volume pumped was 30 bbl with RPM of 9.5 bbl. The well was tested after the
job and it flowed at an average of 65 BOPD with 55% water cut (Figs. 7 and 8).
SPE-176100-MS 9

Figure 7—Bungsu 11 formation 1,900 ft log interpretation

Figure 8 —Bungsu 11 oil production and water cut

10 SPE-176100-MS

Case 3: Beruk 46
The objective of acidizing treatment to well Beruk 46 is to remove damage caused by scale deposit, thus
increasing oil production from interval 1,850 to 1,853 ft (1,440 ft sand formation). The design was to
pump 10 bbl of 15% HCl acid system and 4 bbl of relative permeability modifier. Even though this well
only consists of one interval, a relative permeability modifier was used to reduce the water cut in post
acidizing. Brine water with a small concentration of permanent clay stabilizer was used to help prevent
fresh-water shock to the formation.

Figure 9 —Beruk 46 oil production and water cut

The well was tested after the job, and it flowed at 72 BOPD average, with 55% water cut. The water
cut remaining stable for four months with oil production remain stable around 60 BOPD.
Conclusions
The presented case histories clearly show the success and benefits of acidizing using the diverter service
with RPM technology. In particular, the RPM technology:
● Can provide acid diversion and permanent water-permeability reduction.
● Can successfully help place acid by selectively diverting acid away from water-bearing zones.
● Does not require special mechanical isolation to isolate the targeted hydrocarbon interval,
alternating stages of acid and diverter.
● Makes these types of treatments economically viable for the operator.
● Poses little to no risk in terms of reducing permeability to hydrocarbon.
● Does not totally eliminate water production, but significantly reduces it.

Results from Well Zamrud 154, Bungsu 11, and Beruk 46 show that using the RPM diverter resulted
in a better production response compared to previous acid-stimulation treatments in which various
diverters were used.

Acknowledgements
The authors thank BOB PT. BSP—Pertamina Hulu Company and Halliburton for their help and
permission to present the paper. The authors also extend a special thanks to the acid crew in Indonesia.
SPE-176100-MS 11

References
Eoff, L., Dalrymple, D., Reddy, B.R. et al. 2003. Development of Hydrophobically Modified
Water-Soluble Polymer as a Selective Bullhead System for Water-Production Problems. Presented
at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas, 5–7 February. SPE-80206-
MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/80206-MS.
Eoff, L., Dalrymple, D., and Reddy, B.R. 2004. Development of Associative Polymer Technology for
Acid Diversion in Sandstone and Carbonate Lithology. Presented at the SPE/DOE Symposium on
Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 17–21 April. SPE-89413-MS. http://dx.doi.org/
10.2118/89413-MS.
Farrera, G., Hernandez, H., Aguilar, R. et al. 2006. Advanced Technology to Reduce Water Cut: Case
Studies from the Pemex Southern Region. Presented at the International Oil Conference and
Exhibition in Mexico, Cancun, Mexico, 31 August–2 September. SPE-103638-MS. http://dx.do-
i.org/10.2118/103638-MS.
Hill, A.D. and Rossen, W.R. 1994. Fluid Placement and Diversion in Matrix Acidizing. Presented at
the University of Tulsa Centennial Petroleum Engineering Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 29 –31
August. SPE-27982-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/27982-MS.
Nieves, G., Fernandez, J., Darlrymple, D. et al. 2002. Field Application of Relative Permeability
Modifier in Venezuela. Presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa,
Oklahoma, 13–17 April. SPE-75123-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/75123-MS.