Water

Control

1
 1-Introduction

Water control

is a chemical or mechanical treatment that isolates (or shuts off)

water encountered down hole so that it is not produced along
with oil.

2
2-Water Control Strategy

2.1-Strategies for the Phases of Water Control

There are the four phases of a water control treatment.

1. candidate identification
2. design
3. execution
4. evaluation

3
2.1.1- Candidate Identification

The process of candidate identification involves a strategy

of treating only suitable wells and understanding that only
bad water (water that does not help to produce oil, or is
produced without any oil in it) should be shut off.

The most important aspect of candidate identification is to

identify the existing type of water control problem. In water
control, the solution depends greatly on the type of problem.

One tool used to identify the problem type is the diagnostic

plot, discussed later in the module.

4
 2.1.2- Design
The design phase of water control involves
•proposing the appropriate solution
•targeting low-risk treatments with rapid payout
•using standard, tested fluids

Appropriate solutions may include

•Fluids
•lateral drain holes
•completion changes
•stimulations
•no treatment

If there is no cost-effective solution to a water control problem, the

customer may be advised that the best choice is no treatment.

To establish a credible image for water control it is important to achieve a

high success rate by only applying the appropriate treatment to suitable
wells. 5
2.1.3- Execution
Execution of a water control treatment includes
an emphasis on the quality-testing of fluids
the placement of fluids where they are required downhole to shut off water

2.1.4- Evaluation

Part of the evaluation phase is to monitor the treatment for correct

placement of the fluid. This allows for an understanding of what is
happening downhole. In addition, the evaluation should assess the effect
of treatment and determine how much extra oil is produced as a result.

6
 3-Reservoir Mechanisms and Problem Types

Before a water control problem can be identified, it is important to understand

the water flow mechanisms in the reservoir and the differences between good
water and bad water.

3.1-Water Flow Mechanisms of A Reservoir

Efficiency ratings are used to estimate the amount of oil that can be
recovered from a reservoir under water drive or water flood. Three
ratings are used. Typically, each of the three ratings is an average of 0.7,
or 70%. The total efficiency of a reservoir is the product of the three
efficiency ratings. When the ratings are multiplied by each other, the
product is approximately 35%. In other words, the typical recovery of oil
from a reservoir under a water sweep is approximately 35% of the
original oil in place (OOIP).

7
 Here are the three ratings.
Sor
•displacement efficiency
•areal sweep efficiency
•vertical sweep efficiency
Displacement Efficiency
Displacement efficiency is a measure of the
Swi
fraction of oil displaced from a rock that is swept
with water.
The initial pore volume of a hypothetical reservoir is
represented on the left. The top (green) portions indicate the
area of porosity that is filled with oil. The bottom portion
indicates the initial water saturation (SWI).
The pore volume after the reservoir has been swept with water
is represented on the right. The top (green) portion represents
the oil left behind, that is, the residual oil saturation, S OR.
8
The amount of oil that can be produced, is calculated as
1 - SOR - SWI.

Displacement efficiency is the result of this equation

divided by the amount of oil initially in place, or
(1 - SOR - SWI) / (1 - SWI).

Displacement efficiency improvement is not a candidate for

water control treatment. Treatment cannot affect the SWI,
which represents the initial state of the reservoir, and which
cannot be changed.
The SOR can be changed by surfactant flooding. However,
surfactant flooding is very expensive and rarely used. It is a
large-volume treatment performed over several years.
Surfactant flooding is not considered a water control
treatment.
9
 Areal Sweep Efficiency

Areal sweep efficiency is a

measure of the fraction of the
horizontal section of the reservoir
that has been swept by water.

The producer is at the right; the injector is at the left. The

blue area has been swept by water and represents about 40%
of the total area.

A 40% areal sweep efficiency is unacceptable. 100% sweep

efficiency cannot be achieved. However, it is possible to reach 70
to 80% areal sweep efficiency, depending on the homogeneity of
the formation.
10
The areal sweep efficiency is dependent on
•areal permeability distribution
•permeability anisotropy (north-south permeability versus east-
west permeability)
•deposition environment
•flood pattern
•fluid mobility

Areal sweep efficiency is only a limited target for water control

treatment. Many problems relating to areal sweep efficiency cannot
be solved with a low-volume treatment.
Examples of Factors Affecting Areal Sweep Efficiency

The position of the wells and the patterns between the producer
and the injector affect the areal sweep efficiency when a reservoir
field is water-flooded.
11
Deposition of strata also plays a role in the areal sweep efficiency.
For example, continuous sand with very good areal sweep
efficiency would be expected in sands deposited uniformly in a
shallow marine environment. However, good areal sweep
efficiency would not be expected in a delta where many sand
channels are deposited on top of each other and the channels are
not well connected.

Last, fluid mobility plays a role in areal sweep efficiency. If a high-

viscosity oil is displaced with a low-viscosity water, the areal sweep
efficiency is poor. As a result, a greater number of wells might be
required compared to situations with a more favorable fluid-
mobility ratio.

12
Vertical Sweep Efficiency

Vertical sweep efficiency is a measure of the fraction of the

vertical section of the reservoir that has been swept by
water. The vertical sweep efficiency is the amount of area
swept by the water divided by the initial area of oil before
the sweep. In this diagram the blue area has been swept by
water and represents about 70% of the total area.

13
Vertical sweep efficiency is dependent on
•vertical permeability profile
•permeability contrast
•deposition environment
•gravity segregation
•fluid mobility
Uniform permeability generally allows for a good water
sweep. Differing permeability results in lower vertical sweep
efficiencies. Depending on the vertical sweep efficiency,
significant amounts of unproduced oil may be left in place.

Several problems relating to vertical sweep efficiency can be

addressed with low-volume treatments near the wellbore.

Recall that vertical sweep efficiency is only one of three

ratings that comprise total efficiency.
14
 3.2-Good Water and Bad Water
Good water must be produced in order to produce oil. Whenever oil and
water are commingled within a reservoir and are flowing together, it is
impossible to produce the oil without producing the water. In such a case,
there is no physical method to shut off the water without shutting off the oil.
If a well is producing good water, no service Schlumberger can provide can
shut it off without shutting off the oil.

Bad water does not help to produce oil. Bad water is produced without any
oil in it. Producing bad water reduces the pressure in a reservoir. Typically, it is
the same water that is being recycled in the process of being pumped out,
separated, cleaned and re-injected.

Good or bad water must be identified when considering a well as a

candidate for water treatment.

15
Good Water and Bad Water

This hypothetical single-layer reservoir initially produces 100% oil. At the

left is either an injector or an active aquifer.

About halfway through the reservoir is a water front, the point at which
the water saturation ranges from 50 to 60%. Behind the water front (at
left) is a mixture of oil and water. Near the injector, the water saturation is
nearly 100%. The producer is still producing 100% oil.

As the water front arrives at the producer, the water saturation is 50 to

60%. The producer is producing a mix of oil and good water. Since there is
still oil commingled with the water, no action is taken to shut off the
water.
Months or years later, the reservoir layer contains mainly water in which
little oil remains. The water/oil ratio at the producer is very high. It is likely
that from 20 to 100 bbl of water are produced for every single barrel of oil
that is produced. In this case, it is not cost-effective to produce the oil
because of the cost of handling the water. The water is considered bad
water and should be shut off. 16
What Are The Water Problem Types?
Simple Complex
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

17
 4-Problem Types
Here are the four main categories of water problems in the reservoir.
1. open flow path
2. edge water
3. bottom water
4. completion problems

4.1- Open Flow Path Problems

An open flow path problem occurs when water flows through some open path
other than the formation matrix. This path gives the water flow a different
behavior.
Types of open flow path problems are

❑ near wellbore flow

❑ fissures to a water layer
❑ fissures to an injector

18
❑Near Wellbore Flow

Near wellbore flow is a problem in or

near the wellbore most commonly
caused by poor cement. Other causes of Oil
near wellbore flow are caving due to
production of sand by the formation
(sanding) and channels in the formation.
Water

The area typically affected by near wellbore flow is immediately

outside the casing. This well was poorly cemented at the zone of
interest. In spite of the bridge plug put inside the casing, water is still
being produced outside the casings through the top set of
perforations.

19
Permanent sealing of watered-out zones with rigid polymer gelling agents

20
Solution to Near Wellbore Flow
The primary solution to near wellbore flow is to pump a fluid such as
cement or gel into the annulus of the well and squeeze it off near the
wellbore.
The choice of fluids, volumes and placement technique are case-specific,
depending on the well configuration.
A cement or gel treatment is usually of small volume (100 to 200 bbl) and
short duration (1 to 2 hr).

Cement has limited penetration into a formation because of its solid

particles and may have to be squeezed several times to get a good seal.
A gel such as MARA-SEAL (mark of Marathon Oil) has no solid particles, can
penetrate the formation matrix 5 ft or more, and can shut off the water
layer.
Resin is sometimes pumped, although this process is very expensive. The
use of resin is limited to extreme temperature conditions under which gel
will not hold.
This type of problem is one of three that is a prime candidate for water
control treatment 21
 ❑Fissures to a Water Layer
Fissures to a water layer cause problems
because the water flows to the wellbore while
oil is bypassed. The oil remains in the
formation matrix and is not produced.
The water could be connected to the well by

•natural fissures
•hydraulic fractures
•fault systems

The challenge relating to fissures to a water layer is to

shut off the fissures that are producing water and not
shut off the fissures producing oil.

22
 Solution to Fissures to A Water Layer
The solution to fissures to a water layer is two-fold. First, a flowing gel is
pumped. A flowing gel, such as MARCIT fluid (mark of Marathon Oil), is a gel
that penetrates the fissures but not the matrix.

The flowing gel fills all the fissures, including the ones producing oil, and is then
overdisplaced. The gel is pushed away from the wellbore in order to retain some
productivity around the wellbore. The gel should not be overdisplaced to such
an extent that it is pushed past the layer of water, or water will be produced
again.

Difficulties with designing this treatment are

•estimating the volume of gel to use

•estimating the amount of overdisplacement
•tailoring the concentration to ensure that the gel is stiff enough so that it is not
produced

This type of problem is not a prime candidate for water control

treatment because of the inherent design uncertainties. 23
❑Fissures to an Injector

Fissures to an injector are an areal sweep problem characterized by

rapid water breakthrough. The problem type can be confirmed by
injecting a chemical tracer and measuring its arrival time at a
producer.

In this areal view of a formation in

which the injector is connected to the
producer by a series of fissures, the
fissures actually take much of the
water pumped into the injector,
leaving the oil bypassed in the matrix.

24
Solution to Fissures to an Injector
The solution to fissures to an injector is to pump a large volume of fluid,
such as MARCIT, which is a flowing gel.

If a tracer is used, it is easy to estimate the volume of gel required. The

tracer movement time represents the breakthrough time from the
injector to the producer and, therefore, the volume of the fissure.

The typical treatment volume is 1000 to 5000 bbl pumped over 2 to 3

days.

This type of problem is one of three that is a prime

candidate for water control treatment.

25
4.2- Edge Water Problems

Edge water problems are the most common type of water problems.

Edge water problems occur when water flows horizontally through the
matrix to the producer. The source of the flow could be an injector or an
active aquifer.

Types of edge water problems are

❑poor areal sweep

❑high-permeability layer without crossflow
❑high-permeability layer with crossflow
❑gravity-segregated layer

26
❑Poor Areal Sweep
Poor areal sweep is any problem in a reservoir that causes early
breakthrough from an injector (or aquifer) to the producer

Among the poor areal sweep problems are

•heterogeneity, characterized by varying permeability across the formation

•anisotropy, a wide contrast in permeability between one direction of the

formation (such as northeast to southwest) and the perpendicular direction
(such as northwest to southeast)

•sand channeling, high-permeability sand formations that connect two wells

together

•fingering due to poor mobility, a result of a poor mobility ratio and a high-
viscosity fluid

27
Solution to Poor Areal Sweep
The large volume swept by water could
represent a wide sand channel, such as
channel A in the diagram.
Poor areal sweep can be solved if there are
low-volume channels between the wells. A gel
can be pumped to fill the channel and to force
the injected water to sweep the oil. A tracer
survey can be run to determine the volume of
the low-volume channel.

If the channel volume is big (such as channel B in the diagram), a large volume
of gel would be required, that is, a polymer flood. This type of treatment is not
cost-effective if the channel volume is large because of the expense of the
fluids.

As an alternative to expensive gel injection, the well configuration can be

changed by drilling lateral drain holes to sweep the bypassed oil.
28
❑High-Permeability Layer without Crossflow

A high-permeability layer without crossflow is a vertical sweep

problem. It occurs in a formation with a high-permeability layer and
one or more low-permeability layers. Thin layers of shale above and
below the high-permeability layer prevent crossflow.

The edge water flows quickly through the high-

permeability layer (or "thief layer") to reach the producer
and cause water production.

29
 Producer

Injector

oil

oil

30
 Solution to High-Permeability Layer without Crossflow
The solution to a high-permeability layer without a crossflow problem is to
shut off either the injector or the producer in the high-permeability layer.

The shut-off can occur in the injector or producer by

•mechanical methods (that is, a casing patch, bypass packer, or bridge

plug)

•fluid methods (that is, squeezing cement at the perforations or

pumping gel such as MARA-SEAL fluids)

Because of the shale layers and the absence of crossflow, this problem can be
treated near the wellbore.

A high-permeability layer without crossflow is the third of the three problem

types that are candidates for Schlumberger water control treatment services.

31
❑High-Permeability Layer with Crossflow
A high-permeability layer with crossflow is also a vertical sweep problem.
Although its characteristics are similar to the high-permeability layer
without crossflow, there are no layers of shale above and below the high-
permeability layer. This makes most treatments ineffective.

In this case, shutting off the producer or

injector with gel or cement is an ineffective
solution. The water injected into the low-
permeability layers sweeps the oil a short
distance and crossflows into the high-
permeability layer. The water takes the path of
least resistance to the producer and causes
water production. The near wellbore
treatment fails and leaves a lot of oil in place.

32
 Producer

Injector

oil

oil

33
Solution to High-Permeability Layer with Crossflow
The solution is a deep gel penetration that fills most of the high-
permeability layer with gel. This solution is difficult to place.

This treatment is effective only when there is a large contrast between the
permeability of the high-permeability layer and the low-permeability
layers. In addition, deep gel penetration only works if the high-permeability
layer is very thin, requiring a small volume of gel. If a large volume of gel is
required, the treatment is often not cost-effective.

A high-permeability layer with crossflow is not a prime target

for water control treatment.

34
Differences between High-Permeability Layers with and without Crossflow

An understanding of the differences between high-permeability layers

with and without crossflow is essential.

High-permeability layers with and without crossflow are multiple-layer

reservoirs. However, in high-permeability layers without crossflow the
solution is simple and in the other the solution is complex. To design a
solution, it must be determined if crossflow exists in the multiple-layer
formations.

One method to determine if crossflow exists between different layers is to

evaluate logs for the presence of continuous shale layers. Another method
is to measure the pressure of the layers using a wireline tool such as an
MDT* Modular Formation Tester tool. If the pressures of the layers differ,
the layers are not interconnected.

35
❑Gravity-Segregated Layer

A gravity-segregated layer is an edge

water problem in a single-layer formation.
Gravity segregates the oil from the water
with high vertical permeability. The edge
water flows from an injector or aquifer
along the bottom of a thick layer of high
vertical permeability.

In the illustration, the water arrives at the producer and is produced from
the bottom of the layer. Some local coning does occur.

36
 Producer

Injector

oil

37
Solution to Gravity-Segregated Layer

In the case of a gravity-segregated layer, shutting off the

producer with gel is ineffective. Such a technique works
for a few days until the water bypasses the gel and gets
produced from perforations higher in the producer.

The best solution is to modify the profile of the producer

by shutting off all the perforations and drilling a lateral
drainhole at the top of the oil layer.

38
 4.3- Bottom water Problems

Bottom water problems occur less

frequently than edge water
problems.

Water coning, the main bottom water problem, is caused by

oil/water contact near the perforations. Water coning is a function
of the critical oil rate, that is, the maximum rate at which oil can
be produced without producing water.
If oil is produced slowly enough, there is not enough drawdown
created to produce the water. However, the critical oil rate is
usually too low for customers because it is not cost-effective to
produce at such a slow rate.
The critical oil rate depends, among other things, on the vertical
permeability (kv) and the gel radius. 39
The most severe coning occurs in vertical wells (left). Horizontal wells (right)
drain more of the hydrocarbon content of the reservoir before severe
water problems develop

40
Solution to Water Coning

A gel treatment near the bottom perforations of the

producer is often proposed as a solution to water coning.
To be effective, the gel must extend from the wellbore at a
radius of at least 50 ft. When a 50-ft radius of gel is formed,
the critical oil rate can be doubled, allowing a greater
production rate. However, if production exceeds the critical
oil rate, water will eventually be produced around the gel.

A 5- to 10-ft gel radius is ineffective.

41
 Disadvantages of the gel treatment are
•large volumes required to create the 50-ft radius

•gel flow is not usually radial but will also flow vertically (creating a
sphere)

•expense of the gel

A gel treatment is usually not cost-effective unless special

conditions are present; e.g., gel treatment is effective if the
formation contains pieces of shale which become connected by
the gel.
In specific situations, large volumes of a low-viscosity gel with a
long delay time (such as DGS* gel) are appropriate.

A better solution to water coning may be to shut off all the

perforations and drill a lateral drain hole near the top of the layer.42
 4.4- Completion Problems

Completion problems are defined as

inappropriate well completions or anything wrong with the
completions.

Examples of completion problems are corrosion holes in the

casing or incorrectly placed perforations. There are no fixed
solutions for completion problems. Each case must be
considered as it arises.

43
 4.4.1-Perforation too close to the water zone

Perforations placed too close to a water zone can present a serious

problem for production control. The correct placement of completions and
perforations is crucial to the long-term success of any producing well.

if the perforations are above the original oil–water contact or below the
gas–oil contact. Coning and cresting will occur much more readily if the
perforations are close to these contacts.

Solution to Perforation too close to the water zone

Engineers can examine core data, driller’s reports and openhole logs to
determine the cut-off point for moveable water. However, these are
inexact and a much more accurate picture of bound and moveable water
can be achieved using systems such as the CMR* Combinable Magnetic
Resonance tool.

44
This tool identifies bound fluids and allows engineers to place completions and
perforations in the optimum locations.

The CMR tool helps to identify productive zones that would have been
ignored in the past, such as those with high water saturation where the
water is bound

45
The CMR tool can help to identify potentially productive zones with high
water saturation where most of the water is bound
46
 5-Solutions
The main criteria for selecting a solution to an identified water
control problem are

•type of water control problem

•type of completion
•reservoir conditions
•formation characteristics
•well type (producer or injector)
•technique(s) available locally

Identification of the type of water control problem is the first

priority, because each problem has a unique solution. Then, the
other five criteria are considered

47
 For example:

➢If a well has undergone dual-completion, there may be limited

access to some parts of the wellbore.

➢Under reservoir conditions, such as very high temperature,

some gels cannot be used.

➢Formation characteristics, such as permeability, determine

whether a treatment is effective.

➢Treatments vary depending on well type. In producers,

treatments are typically small volumes of MARA-SEAL gel. In
injectors, large volumes of MARCIT gel may be pumped to shut
off fissures.

48
 5.1-There are the two categories of solutions

•chemical solutions
•mechanical solutions

➢Chemical Solutions
The six types of chemical solutions to water control problems are

1. polymer-based systems (including MARA-SEAL and MARCIT

system
2. inorganic gel systems (including DGS and sodium silicate systems
3. cement-based systems
4. resin-based systems (for use under high temperatures
5. continuous polymer injection (that is, polymer flood
6. selective fluids

49
➢Mechanical Solutions

The five types of mechanical solutions to water control

problems are

1. sealing devices (including bridge plugs, casing patches and

bypass packers)
2. lateral drainholes
3. Re-perforation
4. completion changes
5. downhole separation

50
 6-Design Placement
Here are the main types of gel injection techniques

1. bullhead injection
2. mechanical isolation
3. dual fluid injection

6.1- Bullhead Injection

Bullhead injection is the pumping of a fluid (such as a gel) down hole without
the use of a packer or other device. It is a low-cost technique. However, as
previously discussed, it is useful only with a selective fluid. Under certain
circumstances, MARCIT gel can be considered as a selective fluid because it
flows only into fissures and not into the formation matrix. MARCIT gel is usually
placed with bullhead injection
51
 Bullhead Injection Simulation
This illustration simulates bullhead injection of a gel
into a wellbore with a watered-out, high-permeability
layer in the middle. At the end of treatment, most of
the gel has penetrated the high-permeability layer as
planned. However, some gel penetration occurs in the
oil-bearing, low-permeability layer near the wellbore,
that is, in the first 6 in. to 1

The problem with bullhead injection is that a small

amount of gel penetration completely shuts off the
low-permeability layer which contains oil.
Bullhead Injection Recommendations
Bullhead injection is only recommended when:
1. a selective fluid is used
2. there are extreme differences in the permeability of formation layers
3. the operator is willing to remove damage to the oil layers chemically or by
perforating 52
 6.2-Mechanical Isolation
The goal of mechanical isolation is to treat the
high-permeability layer while using a bridge
plug just below the layer and tubing with a
packer above it. Mechanical isolation is the
most common technique used for pumping
MARA-SEAL fluids.

Mechanical Isolation Simulation

This graph shows that most of the gel has
penetrated the high-permeability layer
without seeping into the low-permeability
layers. The required gel placement has
been achieved.
However, presence of a gravel pack, or
channel behind casing, or a formation
structure with high vertical permeability
can make this treatment ineffective.
53
 Mechanical Isolation Recommendations

Mechanical isolation is a useful technique when applied under the following

conditions:

➢no vertical flow path

➢low vertical permeability
➢no gravel pack
➢high contrast in permeability between water and oil layers
➢thick, low-permeability layers adjacent to the high-permeability layer
➢impermeable laminations (such as shale) separate the layers

water control problem is not a candidate for mechanical isolation if

there are fractures or near-wellbore flow. In such cases, the gel will
bypass the packer and invade the oil layer.

54
 6.3-Dual Fluid Injection
Dual fluid injection has the same mechanical
setup as mechanical isolation. The dual fluid
injection differs because while the gel is
pumped down the tubing, a protective fluid is
pumped down the annulus. The protective fluid
(generally water or oil) flows into the upper low-
permeability layer which contains oil.

Dual Fluid Injection Simulation

This graph shows the results of a dual fluid
injection. The gel is contained entirely in the high-
permeability layer despite a vertical flow path
outside the casing. The protective fluid has
prevented the gel from penetrating the low-
permeability layer by creating the same
treatment pressure above the packer as below
the packer.
55
Intra-well
isolation is achieved with
an inflatable packer run
on coiled tubing.
However, as a result of
poor cementing, there is
direct communication
between the wateredout
layer and the oil
layer. A gelling agent
injected into the
watered-out
perforations will
probably enter and
damage the oil layer

56
In many dual
injection jobs a packer is
run into the well on
work string or coiled
tubing and placed
between two perforated
intervals. In this case
gelling agent is injected
down the tubing and
protective fluid is sent
down the annulus

57
Potential problems with gelling agent injection
for water shut-off treatment

58
 Dual Fluid Injection Recommendations
Dual fluid injection is the placement method of choice when any of the following
conditions exist:
•high vertical permeability
•gravel pack completions
•communication behind the pipe
•no horizontal barriers
•thin adjacent oil-bearing layers

Dual Injection Process

Dual fluid injection has been used for some time. It is a difficult
technique to conduct effectively because exact pumping rates for the
two fluids are not known. If the protective fluid is pumped too fast, the
pressure may increase and cause the fluid to flow through an annular
gap or to migrate through vertical permeability to dilute the gel.

59
 Dual Injection Job Execution

The illustration shows two pumps set up

at the same time. Gauges above and
below the packer measure the pressures
of the protective fluid and treating fluid.
Coiled tubing with wireline cable is used
to provide surface readout of the two
pressures.

During water control treatment, flow rates can be adjusted so pressures of

the two fluids downhole are equal. When the fluid pressures are equal, there
is no bypass of the fluid around the packer. Another advantage is real-time
data about the pressures.

60
61
 Dual Injection Tool String Layout

In order of connection, the primary elements of the

tool string for a dual injection job are

✓coiled tubing with a wireline to surface

✓telemetry system
✓two pressure gauges
✓setting tool
✓inflatable packer.
✓gamma ray tool and casing collar locator to provide depth correlation
✓check valve and weak point (part of a normal coiled tubing setup)

62
Coiled Tubing with wireline
Sensor Module:
GR, CCL, Dual Pressure, Temperature
Inflate Orifice

Mechanical Disconnect

CoilFLATE Packer

Injection Valve

63
There are advantages to using coiled tubing for the dual injection job:

1. The conventional tubing does not have to be pulled out of the

hole in order to place the coiled tubing.

2. The process can be completed without the use of a rig.

3. A major advantage of the dual injection process is correct fluid

placement.

64
Design Placement Summary
Bullhead injection is used only for selective fluids (such as
MARCIT fluid) or as a last resort for gel placement. In the latter
case, it is used only when there is a high contrast in formation
layer permeability. Other strategies such as overflushing the
gel can be helpful in a fractured reservoir.
Mechanical isolation is effective with low vertical flow. If a
permanent plugging fluid such as MARA-SEAL, PERMABLOK*
fluid, or cement is used, the treatment design must ensure its
proper placement. Typically, a mechanical isolation system is
required.

In the most difficult cases, a dual fluid injection is used.

Dual fluid injection is used when vertical flow around the
packer could be a problem.
65
 7-Fluids
The discussion of fluids is last in order to de-emphasize
fluids in favor of a strategy that considers all engineering
aspects of water control first. However, knowledge of the
availability and selection of suitable fluids is essential

The major brands of fluids used in water control are shown in

the following table

66
7.1-Water Control Fluids

Polymer systems •Rigid gels for near wellbore

•Flowing gels for natural fissures

Inorganic gels •Low viscosity for low

permeability or deep
penetration
Monomers systems None

Cement systems •Regular Cement

•Microfine Cement
•SqueezeCRETE*

Resin systems None

Smart fluids
67
7.1-Water Control Fluids
• OrganoSEAL*-R
– Rigid Organic X-Linked PAA
for near wellbore use
• MARA-SEALSM
– Rigid chrome crosslinked
polymer for near wellbore
use
• OrganoSEAL*-F
– Flowing Organic X-Linked
PAA for use in
fissures/fractures
• MARCITSM
– Flowing chrome cross-
linked polymer for use in
fissures
• DGS*
– Inorganic gel with long
set times and low
injection viscosity
• PERMABLOK*
– Inorganic gel for near
wellbore use
• SqueezeCRETE* Cement
– Optimized Microfine
Cement for tight
channels squeezes
• Smart Fluids
68
7.1-Water Control Fluids

Two major types of water control fluid systems are

1. Polymer systems, which include polyacrylamides and co- or

terpolymers of acrylamide. The acrylamides are sometimes
crosslinked with metal or organic systems for purposes such as
providing stability in high temperatures. Polyacrylamides are
the most common of the polymer systems. Polymer gels such
as MARA-SEAL and MARCIT are crosslinked with metals.

2. Inorganic gels, which are nonpolymer systems that include

silicates such as PERMABLOK and ZONELOCK, and DGS, a
delayed gelation system. There is increasing interest in
inorganic gels that have a higher temperature stability. These
systems typically have a low injection viscosity, which is useful
in treating low-permeability zones.

69
 Product Composition Application
MARA-SEAL fluid Rigid, crosslinked polymer Near-wellbore use

MARCIT fluid Flowing, crosslinked polymer Use in fissures

DGS gel Inorganic gel with a controlled Deep penetration

set time (up to several days)
and a viscosity close to water
during injection
PERMABLOK and Inorganic silicate gels with Low-permeability
ZONELOCK* gels controlled set time (up to formations
several hours) and a viscosity
close to water during
injection
Microfine cement Perforation shut-off
FURAN* resin Very high-
temperature
applications
70
 Rigid Gels Technology

• MARA-SEALSM & OrganoSEAL*- R Gels – Temperature Limit

– Rigid gels for matrix near well bore – 225 oF for regular
treatments MARA-SEAL
– Selective placement is a requirement, – 300 oF for MARA-SEAL
3-6 ft penetration with LDH polymer
– Low molecular weight polyacrylamide – 325 oF for
(Molecular Weight 300,000 - 500,000) OrganoSEAL-F
– Crosslinking – Mixing
– MARA-SEAL is x-linked with – Batch mix using
Cr3+ existing cement
– OrganoSEAL-R is organically x- equipment
linked – Hydrate for one hour

(SM) Service Mark of Marathon Oil Company

(*) Mark of Schlumberger

71
 MARA-SEAL and OrganoSEAL-R

400 204
Regular MARA-SEAL

LDH MARA-SEAL
Temperature, °F

300 149

Temperature, °C
OrganoSEAL-R With Primary X-Linker

OrganoSEAL-R With Secondary X-Linker

200 93

100 38

MARA-SEAL OrganoSEAL-F
0 -18
Gels Cross linking System

72
 Flowing Gels Technology

• MARCITSM & OrganoSEAL*- F Gels – Temperature Limit

– Flowing gels for deep penetration in – 200 oF for MARCIT
fractured/fissured/faulted formation.
– 325 oF for OrganoSEAL-F
• Only penetrates open flow paths
and does not penetrate matrix – Mixing
– Bullhead or CT placement. Volumes – Continuous mix due to
typically 1000 bbls to 10000 bbls large volumes
– High molecular weight polyacrylamide – Requires low cost
(Molecular Weight 5-15MM) WBS113 skid
– Crosslinking
– MARCIT is x-linked with Cr3+
– OrganoSEAL-F is organically
x-linked

(SM) Service Mark of Marathon Oil Company

(*) Mark of Schlumberger

73
 MARCIT and OrganoSEAL-F

400 MARCIT 204

OrganoSEAL-F

300 149

Temperature, °C
Temperature, °F

200 93

100 38

MARCIT OrganoSEAL-F
0 -18
Flowing Gels Crosslinking System

74
SqueezeCRETE*

• Applications
– Sealing flow behind casing
– Casing leaks
– Sealing fractures
– Squeezing gravel pack

• Properties
– Small particles to flow through small gaps
– Low fluid loss and minimal filter cake
– Low viscosity and friction pressure
– High strength
– Low permeability
– Resistance to chemical attack

75
SqueezeCRETE

• Comparison with microfine cement

– New technology - entirely new behavior
– Deeper penetration in tighter channels
– Microfine cement mean particle size of 12 microns + 2
smaller particles
– SqueezeCRETE completely penetrates 160 micron slot
– Microfine cement penetrated only 1 cm, with obvious
fingering

• Previously called OMS

76
7.2-Fluid selection
Fissure?
Rigid fluid Flowing gel

T>200?
Where?
Matrix Wellbore
OrganoSEAL-F
K>25md
MARCIT
Inorganic Polymer
Cement
PERMABLOK MARA-SEAL

DGS Resin
OrganoSEAL-R

77
7.3-Fluid volume
Fissure?
Rigid fluid Flowing gel

Where? Tracer test

Matrix Wellbore

K>25md Channel
or perf. Vol.
Inj. Test.
Inorganic Polymer

3 to 20 ft 3 to 6 ft
penetration penetration

78
 7.4-Temperature Application Chart
DegF
(C)

300
(149)

250
(121)

200
(93)

OrganoSEAL*-R

SqueezeCRETE
OrganoSEAL*-F

PERMABLOK
MARA-SEAL

Furan Resin
MARCIT

150
(65)
DGS

100
(38)

This chart shows the relative temperature

applications of various water control fluids.
79
 7.5-Fluids - Relative Costs Per BBL

Furan Resin (Off Scale ->)

MicroFine Cement
OrganoSEAL*-R
MARA-SEAL

PERMABLOK
DGS
OrganoSEAL*-F
MARCIT

MARCIT gel has a low cost per barrel because of its low gel concentration.
Microfine cement is much more expensive than conventional cement, but it
is more useful in penetrating small annular spaces.
80
8-MARA-SEL and MARCIT Gels

The polymer gels widely used and well proven in field applications are

•MARA-SEAL gel, which is excellent for use with near-wellbore

problems and with high-permeability layers without crossflow, two of
the three problem types that are prime candidates for water control
treatment.

•MARCIT gel, which is excellent for use in shutting off fissures to an

injector, one of the three problem types that is a prime candidate for
water control treatment.

81
 8.1-MARA-SEL and MARCIT Gels
The table compares the specifications of MARA-SEAL and MARCIT gels.
Specification MARA-SEAL MARCIT
Polyacrylamide crosslink Chromium-III (chrome) Chromium-III (chrome)
Polymer loading by weight High (4 - 8%) Low to medium (0.3 to
1.5%)
Molecular weight Low (200 to 500 M) High (5 to 15 M)
Gel Elastic, high-strength, non- Flowing, pumped long
rehealing after crosslinking
Matrix penetration For total shutoff of near Very little
wellbore
Reservoir type Fractured or fissured
Ambient temperature use To 255_F (121_C) To 200_F (93_C)

Treatment size 50 to 500 bbl (at 1 to 2 1,000 to 15,000 bbl

bbl/ft)
Treatment rate 1 bbl/min through coiled 1 to 3 bbl/min
tubing
82
 9 - Candidate Recognition & Diagnostics

Diagnostic methods

• 3 main families
– Logging
– Production data analysis
– Interwell Tracers

83
 Logging for Water Control
• •
• •
3 main groups • •
• Reservoir pressure profile • •
• Reservoir saturation profile
• Wellbore fluid production profile
Diagnosis - Saturation Profile

Reservoir Saturation Tool

85
Coning Detection

86
Diagnosis - Pressure Profile

MDT

87
Pressure/flow Profile

88
Diagnosis - Multi-Rate Test

PLT-MLT
89
Diagnosis - Production Profile
• •
• •
PS Platform • •
• •

90
Diagnosis – Water Flow Log
WFL and Rate
Interpretation

Combining the TPHL water holdup with

the WFL velocity data shown in track 5
shows all the water is entering from the
lower perfs. A combination of
temperature modeling and slip velocity
correlations were used to define the oil
flow profile.

91
Diagnosis - Completion Problems

92
 Production data analysis - Procedure
• Production history
– Data available without cost

• Mapping of data at field level

– OFM and Moving domain
– Identify areas of field, or specific wells, needing attention
• Diagnostic plots
– Production history plot
– Recovery plot
– Decline analysis plot
– Water/oil ratio and derivative plot
• Shut-in / Choke-back analysis

93
 Production History

• Good candidates for Water Control usually show

– an increase in water production and
– a decrease in oil production
– starting at about the same time
10000

1000
Qw
Barrels per day

Qo
100

10

0.1
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

94
The WOR and WOR’ curves have been developed assuming
consistent production. Any changes in the production can
jeopardize the interpretation of the curves. In this case a
thorough well/reservoir study must be carried out.

95
 Recovery plot
• Plot of log WOR Vs cumulative production
• Extrapolate to economic limit of WOR
• If cumulative oil is equal expected reserves -
Good water
log WOR

Cumulative oil bbl

96
 Decline plot
• Semi log plot of oil rate Vs cumulative oil
• Normal straight line decline
• Increasing decline may indicate problem other
than water 10000

– Depletion 1000

– Damage build-up , bpd

Water

100
and
Oil

10

0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000

Cumulative Oil, Bbls

97
 Diagnostic plot
• Log/log plot WOR Vs production time
– Also use WOR derivative

• Use to identify type of problem

– Open flow path
– Linear flow
• Edge water
• OWC moving up
– Coning

98
 High Conductivity Layer

10

1 WOR
WOR or WOR'

WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

99
High conductivity layer – Simulation

➢Note the low WOR before the breakthrough.

➢The WOR rapidly increases to 0.3. This low value shows
the breakthrough of a small high permeability layer.
➢WOR and WOR’ increase.

100
 Water Coning

10

1
WOR or WOR'

WOR
0.1
WOR'

0.01

0.001

0.0001
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

101
Water coning - Simulation
➢The WOR gradually levels out to a value typically between 1
and 10. Water breakthrough is generally quite quick.
➢Once the cone reaches the top of the perforation it flattens
and the WOR slowly increases.
➢The WOR’ shows a gradual decrease.

102
 Mature Coning

10.00
WOR or WOR'

1.00

WOR
0.10 WOR'

0.01

0.00
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

103
Mature coning - Simulation
When the cone is fully developed (reaches the reservoir
edges) the watered zone acts like a high conductivity
layer and the WOR and WOR’ increase.

104
 Coning for various spacing

10 Acres
10
20 Acres

30 Acres

60 Acres
WOR

1
120 Acres

0.1

0.01
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

105
The formation of the cone depends on the spacing
(edge effect). In small spacing the coning appears like a
high permeability layers.

106
 Comparison

High conductivity layer

10 Water coning
WOR

0.1

0.01
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days
Note the very different shapes of the curves.
The diagnosis must be backed-up with
inspection of well logs, well location, etc.
107
 1. Production history
10000

1000
Qw
Barrels per day

Qo
100

10

0.1
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

108
➢Oil decreases and water increases at the same time = water
problem and not skin problem.

➢Problem is difficult to analyze with only this plot (solution on

the next transparency).

109
 1. High Conductivity Layer
100
WOR
WOR'
10
WOR or WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

110
➢Solution obviously appears in this graph.
➢WOR and WOR’ increase = high conductivity layer
➢This is a multi-layered reservoir in a line drive water flood. the
straight line is interpreted as a series of layer with low (<4)
permeability contrast successively breaking through.

111
 2. High Conductivity Layer
10
WOR
WOR'
1
WOR or WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

112
Note the WOR’ decrease at 3000 days. This type of
abnormal behavior can only be explain with reference to the
well history. In this case a near-by injector was shut in
causing a temporary decrease in WOR.

113
 4. High Conductivity Layer

10

1 WOR
WOR or WOR'

WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000
Days

114
➢In the first part (4000 to 10 000 days) of the WOR plot we have a
slope of 4 due to a high conductivity layer breakthrough.

➢The slope increase to 10 in the second part can be due to:

a possible second high conductivity layer breakthrough,
a near-wellbore flow like fracture,
but not to a cement failure because the slop is not infinite.

➢This is a dolomite formation in new Mexico

115
 5. Mature Coning

10

WOR
1
WOR or WOR'

WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Days

116
➢First slow increase in the WOR plot, and decrease of the WOR’ =
coning

➢After increase in the WOR’ = mature coning (edge effects).

➢This is an Alaska well in sandstone.

117
 6. Open flow path
100

WOR
10
WOR'

1
WOR or WOR'

0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
1 10 100 1 000 10 000
Days

118
 Shut-in and choke-back analysis
14000 5

4.5
12000

10000
3.5

3
8000
Water Rate
Oil Rate
2.5
Liquid Rate
WOR
6000
2

1.5
4000

2000
0.5

0 0
12-Dec-92 30-Jun-93 16-Jan-94 04-Aug-94 20-Feb-95 08-Sep-95 26-Mar-96 12-Oct-96

119
 Assumptions
• One layer producing oil
• One layer producing ‘bad’ water
• Water is at a higher pressure

20 md 20 ft

400 md 4 ft
 Nodal - Water at higher pressure
3000
Flowing Pressure - psi

2000

WOR = 6.7

1000

Oil Water Total

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Flow Rate - bbl/day

121
This case is the same well as case 2 but now we
consider the effect of choking back the well. This tubing
intake curve is for a flowing wellhead pressure of 100
psi - no choke.

122
 Nodal - Well Choked Back
Flowing Pressure - psi
3000

WOR = 9.8
2000

1000

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Flow Rate - bbl/day

123
➢Now the well has been choked back to a wellhead flowing
pressure of 600 psi.

➢The total production rate has decreased and the WOR has
increased due to the very low oil production rate.

➢If the well is further choked back the bottomhole pressure

will be above the oil zone pressure and the oil production will
go to zero - with an infinite WOR.

124
 Nodal - Diagnosis Using WOR
Flowing Pressure - psi

3000

WOR = 9.8
2000

WOR = 6.7
1000

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Flow Rate - bbl/day

125
 Diagnostics - Tracers
• Agricultural dyes, Fluorecein dyes
– Low cost, Absorbed quickly, Detect visibly to 2 ppm
• Potassium iodide
– Low absorption, Easily detected to 65 ppm, 5 ppm in
lab
• Radioactive tracers
– Triciated water, thiocynate, cobalt
– Very effective but require special handling
• Salt, sugar, boron compounds, ammonia,
surfactants, iron compounds, manganese
compounds, chromates, phosphates
126
 Tracers - Detection and Analysis
• Detection
– Lab analysis of produced fluid samples
– Wireline tools : gamma ray
• Transit time
– high conductivity channel Vs. fracture/fissures network
• Total recovery

Concentration
– treatment volume

Time

➢See the Water Control Engineering Manual for case histories of tracer survey.
➢Specialised service companies provide tracer services: for example Protechnics
based in Houston.

127
Tracer example 1
• Determination of oriented
fractures
– Based on transit time, the volume
of the fracture estimated to be
450 bbl
A tracer test conducted in a West Texas field yielded the results shown in the above
figures. A triatiated (tritium) water tracer injected into Wells 14 and 15 moved rapidly
to Wells 13, 11, and 19. A plot of the data from Well 13 is also shown. The tracer
appeared at Well 13 in 24 hours with the cumulative tracer recovered during that
period being some 45% of the total tracer injected.

Injection rate at the time of tracer injection was 1000 BPD. Based on the transit time
and the fraction of tracer recovered, the volume of the fracture can be calculated to be
450 bbl. In subsequent tests on these same wells, selected vertical sections of the
reservoir were tested with tracers. It was shown that a high conductivity section existed
in the bottom portion of the reservoir; therefore, only that section was treated with a
profile control agent.

Diagnostic: randomly oriented fractures appear to be conducting fluid from injector to

producer and damaging water flood performance. A gel treatment to close off the
fractures was recommended.
Design: In such treatments, it has been found by trial and error that the volume of
corrective treatment should exceed the calculated fracture volume several-fold.
10-Summary

In the past, water control was treated as a fluids

problem. Today, the strategy behind water control
treatment is weighted toward the engineering
aspects of candidate identification and design.
Schlumberger’s goal is to provide a complete
engineering service for water control.

133