Sandstone Acidizing Design

With a Generalized Model

R. Taha, * SPE, A.D. Hili, SPE, and K. Sepehrnoorl, SPE, U. of Texas

Summary. Acidizing of sandstones with HF/HCI mixtures is most frequently applied to remove near-wellbore damage, often in
reservoirs with considerable vertical heterogeneity. A previously presented model for such processes in which an organic resin
diverting agent was used has been extended to account for any type of particulate diverting agent and to allow for injection of
multiple sequences of acid and diverting agent at either constant rates or constant bottomhole pressures (BHP's). When used to
design treatments for a typical U.S. gulf coast reservoir, the model has shown that the optimal treatment strategy depends on both
diverting-agent efficiency and the desired depth of live acid penetration and that relatively high injection rates appear advantageous
for the conditions imposed by the model.
A general model of diverting-agent behavior was developed from filtration theory. A single parameter, the specific cake
resistance, is needed to model the diverting-agent behavior in the acidizing simulator. Calculation procedures to determine this
parameter from laboratory tests of diverting agents were developed. These tests are either constant-rate, constant-pressure, or
variable-rate and variable-pressure experiments; in each case, the specific cake resistance can be extracted from the experimental
data. These procedures allow the efficiencies of various diverting agents to be compared on an equal basis.
The sandstone acidizing model was used to design a treatment for a typical gulf coast sandstone reservoir. On the basis of an
overall skin factor for the well, various assumptions were made about the distribution of formation damage around this
multilayered completion. Treatment results were found to be fairly sensitive to the details of the damage distribution, suggesting
that the skin factor alone may not be an adequate design parameter.

Introduction
Removal of near-wellbore damage may be achieved through matrix
acidizing where mixtures of HF and HCI are injected into the for-
mation below fracture pressures to react with formation minerals
and materials deposited during the production process. Such
treatments are usually conducted in reservoirs exhibiting contrasting
vertical injectivity, consequently causing uneven placement of
treating fluid. Diverting agents are commonly used in this situation
to reduce the natural flow of fluid into sections of higher injectivity ,
thus ensuring a more even distribution. 1 Particulate solids specif-
ically were found to be excellent diverting agents. 2-6 These cake-
forming diverters demonstrated high resistance to flow, resulted
in better diversion, and possessed good cleanup characteristics.
A single-well model developed previously 7 simulates the acidi-
zation process in heterogeneous reservoirs. By dividing the for-
mation into multiple, noncommunicating layers of various
properties, we accounted for vertical reservoir heterogeneity. These
layers, in turn, were subdivided radially into concentric cylinders
of various physical and chemical properties to allow for incorpo-
ration offormation damage by changing near-wellbore properties.
This model also included the effect of diverting agent on acid dis-
tribution through use of the model equation for the behavior of or-
ganic resin diverters presented by Hill and Galloway. 3 From this
work, we concluded that the pressure drop across the diverting-
agent cake must be comparable to the pressure drop in the formation
before effective diversion can happen.
In the diverting-agent model used previously, the pressure drop
through a cake was dependent only on the amount of cake deposited.
This explains another earlier conclusion that low injection rates
promote efficient diversion because at such rates the pressure drop
in the formation is low but the pressure drop in the diverting agent
remains unaffected (regardless of rate). Using filtration theory,
Doerler and Prouvost 2 later offered a more general model of
diverting-agent behavior. The equation showed the dependence of
the cake pressure drop on the product of flux and amount of cake
deposited. The current study uses the same theory to characterize
different types of diverting agents and introduces interpretation tech-
niques for the various laboratory tests normally performed in the
industry.
From interpretation of test data, a parameter called the specific
cake resistance, which directly reflects the efficiency of a given
diverting agent, can be computed. This parameter is related to cake
and particle properties so that it can render a means of scaling up
test data to field situations. We have included this feature in the
existing model to enable the prediction or evaluation of treatments
'Now at Esso Production Malaysia Inc.
Copyright 1989 Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Production Engineering, February 1989
aided by any particulate diverting agent. Furthermore, with the
added ability to handle multiple sequences of fluids injected at either
constant rates or constant BHP's, this generalized model will be
able to simulate normally encountered field conditions. The utility
of the acidizing model in designing a treatment for a typical sand-
stone reservoir is demonstrated.
Characterization of Diverting Agents
From Laboratory Data
In general, materials with particle size of less than 5 /lm are thought
to constitute the class of materials that form compressible filter
cakes. 8 The materials used as diverting agents have been reported
to have particle sizes ranging from 5 to 44 /lm. 2,6 From this ob-
servation, diverting-agent materials may be expected to behave as
incompressible cakes and the underlying approach is derived as such.
Ruth et al. 9 depicted the flow through a filter cake as equivalent
to that of a bundle of parallel, circular capillaries of equal diameter
with length equal to the cake thickness. In doing so, they have
assumed that the end effects and wall roughness are negligible and
that the cake particles are of the same size and shape, packed ran-
domly without any preferred orientation. Such a model1ends itself
to the theoretically proven Poiseuille's equation, the derivation of
which is also restricted to Newtonian fluid of constant viscosity and
density. 10 In addition, if fluid velocity is low, inertial forces will
be insignificant, and the driving force is opposed only by viscous
shear present between the fluid layers.
By equating surface areas of capillaries to surface areas of bed
particles and replacing capillary radii by equivalent hydraulic radii
of the irregular pore spaces, we can give the resulting pressure drop
across a .cake as
Grouping the intrinsic cake properties on one side of the equation
and the measurable quantities on the other side yields the definition
for the specific cake resistance, a:
a= llPcgcA = Fs (l-cP c ) (Asp)2 .................. (2)
/luCda V Pp cP~ Vp
The specific cake resistance is intrinsically related to the ability
of a cake to impede flow. It forms an equal basis on which various
cake-forming materials can be compared. The numerical value of
49
 or-------r-------r-~--~r_----~------_,
o
o
o o
o e 10 GAL/1000 GAL
N ., TYPE 1
6 5 GALhooo GAL
" TYPE 2 + 1 GALhooo GAL
o
HO ...J
o
~~
0')'
a...~
()o
W
W 0')
~o
<to
().
o WO
1-'"
N
z- <to
~
H

a... o
00 ...J
0:::0 I..&...~
o· o 6
co wo
0')
0') 0:::
0') w
Wo > ., 6
0:::0
a.... zo
1-1'"
o
o
.... e
.
6
e 6 +

o
~ At!J6i!J
e" o
o
"ej 6 66 6.f>J + + + + ++-P-

°o~.-o-o----~------~------~-------r------~
0 0 . 00 1.60 3.20 4.80 6.40 8.00 2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50
TIME. MINUTES VOLUME. LITRE

Fig. 1-Dlvertlng-agent pressure drop-constant-rate ex- Fig. 3-Dlvertlng-agent behavior In constant-pressure ex-
periment. periment.

or-----~r_----_,r_----_,r------,------_,

o
o
oo " e HILL AND GALLOWAY. 2 RUNS o
.... • Z " • )( + DOERL ER AND PROUVOST. e RUNS

o •
HO
0')' " +x+
,.,
a...::l
• "•
+x

• )1.+

.,
• +, .
)I
+
X
X

"
e
•+'" X
6
" e

0')
0')
Wo e
0:::0
a....
o
"
" "
III
e
e
o o
o o
~+.-5-0----~-------r-------r-------r------~
0.03 0.06 0.09 O. 12 0.15 1. 80 1. 70 1. 80 1. 90 2.00
(mda/A)(q/A), (LBM-ML)/MIN/IN. 4 *10. 1 VOLUME. LITRE

Fig. 2-Normalized constant-rate data. Fig. 4-Late-time data in constant-pressure experiment.

this parameter can be determined from laboratory tests for three
different cases: constant rate, constant pressure, and variable rate
and pressure. To date, only three separate studies 2-4 have provided
data amenable to such quantification.
Hill and Galloway 3 reported constant-rate data for core ex-
periments using oil-soluble resins. In this case, flow rate is simply
the ratio of injection volume to injection time, and for an incom-
pressible cake, Eq. 2 can be integrated to yield
ilPc=k1t, ......................................... (3)
noring the early stages, a straight line through the data yields an
excellent fit with linear regression factor, r2, of 1.000 and 0.997.
With a core diameter of 1 in. [2.54 cm], an injection rate of
3 mLlmin, and a fluid viscosity of 1 cp [0.001 Pa·s], the com-
puted Ci values are 1.1 x 10 14 and 9. 1 x 10 14 ft/lbm [7.4 x 10 13 and
6.1 x 10 14 m/kg].
Doerler and Prouvost 2 also performed several constant-rate ex-
periments. Eq. 3 can be rearranged to normalize data for different
rates and concentrations:

where kl = CiU 2 JLCda lgc' Eq. 3 suggests a linear relationship be-

tween the cake pressure drop and injection time. Fig. 1 shows two
plots from Hill and Galloway's single-core runs: Type 1 and Type
2, injected at concentrations of 0.5 and 0.1 vol %, respectively. Ig-
ilPc=k2(~)( mda ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
A
where k2 = CiJLlg c' Fig. 2 plots both Doerler and Prouvost's and
Hill and Galloway's data for single-core runs. Type 1 diverting agent

50 SPE Production Engineering, February 1989

 TABLE 1-ACIDIZING·CASE·STUDY DESIGN DATA
e
e
Well ,,;
Tubing, in. x Ibm/ft 2318 x 5.8

--- --- ---

Casing, in. x Ibm/ft 7x35 o
Packer, ft 9,210 He
Total depth, ft 9,560 ....
<. '" /-----
0::'"
Perforated zones, ft /
Zone 1 9,290 to 9,340 t'
Zone 2 9,375 to 9,405 I
Zone 3 9,430 to 9,470 I
Flow rate, BID 300 I
I
Flowing bottom hole temperature, of 150 I
Skin factor 15 /
Reservoir /
/
Pressure, psi 3,000 /
Fracture gradient, psi/ft 0.65 /
Zone 1 (top) /
</> 0.17 /
k, md 200 /
Zone 2 (middle) I WITHOUT DIVERTING AGENT
l WITH DIVERTING AGENT
</> 0.19
k. md 700 e
e
Zone 3 (bottom)
50.00 100.00 1 50.00 ,200.00 250.00
</> 0.17 INJECTION VOLUME, GAL/FT
k, md 150
Oil
Fig. 5-Comparison of acid treatments with and without di·
p (bottomhole), g/cm 3 0.85 vertlng agent.
Oil FVF 1.2
Formation Water
NaCI, % 1 The disagreement between the King and Hollingsworth data and
Ca, ppm 50 the filter-cake theory is likely caused by the extremely high injection
K,ppm 200 rates used in these tests. At the start of these experiments, the in-
Other cations trace
jection rate was about 16 cm 3 /sec, which yields a flux (qIA) of
Sandstone (%) 47.3 cm/min. By comparison, the highest flux used by Doerler and
Feldspar 5 Prouvost was 4.6 cm/min; in Hill and Galloway's single-core ex-
CaC0 3 10 periments, the flux was 0.59 cm/min. The high injection rate in
Clay (kaolinite) 5 the King and Hollingsworth experiments led to a nonuniform dis-
Quartz 80 tribution of the diverting agent and deformation of the sand pack
Diverting Agent used as the porous medium. A photograph of the diverting-agent
Organic resin filter cake at the end of an experiment showed it to be depressed
a, ftllbm 5.7x 10 13 significantly in the middle and pushed up along the sides. The high
flow rate pushed sand from the middle of the apparatus to the sides
of the sandpack holder, leading to a nonuniform flow field. Be-
in Hill and Galloway's experiments seemed to be more effective cause the filter-cake model is based on a uniform flux and a uniform
than that used by Doerler and Prouvost, while Type 2 demonstrated distribution of the diverting agent, it cannot account for the con-
comparable efficiency. The a values determined from Doerler and ditions that occurred in these experiments.
Prouvost's six runs ranged between 2.5x10 13 and 1O.0x10 13 Besides single-core experiments, Hill and Galloway also simu-
ft/lbm [1.7x 10 13 and 6.7x 10 13 m/kg], with an average value of lated wellbore conditions using a laboratory apparatus with three
6.2x1013 ft/lbm [4.2X10 13 m/kg]. Doerler and Prouvost sug- perforations attached to cores of differing permeabilities. In this
gested that the spread in efficiencies is a result of the mechanism case, both the flow rate and the pressure drop for a given core change
of deposition as dictated by the injection rate. Lower flow rates with time. Given data for both time discharge and pressure drop
or lower concentrations favor particle blocking, and the finer par- vs. time, the value of ex can be computed for an incompressible
ticles are allowed to migrate into the porous medium, thereby cake. Eq. 2 can now be integrated from the start of the experiment
delaying cake buildup. (t=O) to any time t to give
Another way of performing diverting-agent tests is to maintain
a constant pressure drop between the face of the cake and the outlet
of the filter medium (or the core). The pressure drop through a 1
- J
r Aptt!:J.Pc(t)dt=k
cylindrical core can be expressed in terms of Darcy's law, while 5V, .............................. (6)
the pressure drop in the cake can be expressed by Eq. 2, yielding
Vo

1 where k5 =exp,Cda/ZA 2 gc The values of the integral vs. volume

-=k3 V+k 4 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
q values of 0.77, 0.94, and 0.99, while the computed a values are
where k3=exp,Cdnl!:J.pgcA2 and k4=pL/kcoreA!:J.p=1/qoo with qo
being the flow rate before cake deposition. Thus, the inverse of
flow rate is a linear function of injection volume. King and
Hollingsworth 4 conducted constant-pressure experiments using or-
ganic resin diverting agents; Fig. 3 shows the inverse flow rate vs.
volume for their data. These plots are not linear as predicted by
the incompressible-filter-cake theory. Plotting the later-time data
from the 1O-gal/l,OOO-gal [0.01-m3/m3] experiment (Fig. 4)
shows that linear behavior was never approached.
were plotted. The best straight-line fits for the three cores gave r2
6.9XIOI3, 5.1XI0 13 , and 4.8x10 13 ft/lbm [4.6xlOl3, 3.4x
10 13 , and 3.2x1013 m/kg].
To summarize these results, it is clear that the specific cake
resistance of organic resin diverting agents can vary significantly,
both from one diverting agent to another and for a particular di-
verting agent. For a single diverting agent, the resistance behavior
may vary with time, perhaps because of particle agglomeration.
Such an effect may explain the difference in ex between Hill and
Galloway's single-core experiments and their model wellbore ex-
periments. Reviewing all the experimental data indicates that a value

SPE Production Engineering, February 1989 51

 o $-- .. -., LAVER 1. WITHOUT DIV. AGENT
o ..... -~- .. LAVER 2. WITHOUT DIV. AGENT

0
•
.... . ..
.,.: +--+-- ... LAVER 3. WITHOUT DIV. AGENT
• e LAVER 1. WITH DIV. AGENT
~---.l.LAVER 2 • WITH DIV. AGENT
+--1---+1 LAVER 3. WITH DIV. AGENT
_4r--6-
.-.--k---
...-- . . - .. LAVER
..... - ... - .. 'LAYER
+- - +- - ... LAVER
• • e LAVER
1. WITHOUT DIV. ACENT
2. WITHOUT DIV. AGENT
3. WITHOUT DIV. AGENT
1. WITH DIV. AGENT
•
0"'; /
k--Ir"
.. .. • LAVER
1 LAYER
2. WITH DIV. AGENT
3. WITH DIV. AGENT
H
~
(
« I
0:: 0
110 I
Z·
0'" J. \
H I \
~
« I ~
...J
=>'"
::;:.
o
J \
\
H'"
~
(f) \\
.,
0 ~

- II')
.... \
~
\
A
o
o II')
-----fl,;---+---+---+-
.... ~-- ....-...... - ... - ... - - 6 - -..... - - 6
50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
INJECTION VOLUME. GAL/FT 50.00 100.00 150.00 ,200.00 250.00
INJECTION VOLUME. GAL/FT
Fig. 6-Stimulation ratio by layer, with and without diverting
agent. Fig. 7-Skin factor by layer, with and without diverting agent.

of specific cake resistance of 5 x 10 13 to 20 x 10 13 ft/lbm [3.4 x
10 13 to 13.4 x 10 13 m/kg] appears to be typical for organic resin
diverting agents.
Except for the constant-pressure-drop experiments of King and
Hollingsworth, the incompressible-filter-cake model described or-
ganic resin diverting-agent behavior well. Of course, the maximum
pressure drop across the diverting agent in any of these experiments
was 400 psia [2760 kPa] in Doerier and Prouvost's experiments.
When field treatments are modeled, the pressure drop across the
diverter may exceed this level, in which case incompressible filter-
cake behavior is being extrapolated. At some pressure drop, the
cake may compress; if this occurs, diversion will be more effective
than predicted by this mod~l.
Acldlzlng Case Studies
The utility of the model in designing an acid treatment is illustrated
here for a typical gulf coast well that penetrates three formation
zones. As often is the case, the information available is minimal
(Table 1). Of particular interest was the fact that the model requires
as input a description of the damaged zone around the well, while
the only datum given about damage was the overall skin factor.
With the physical state around the wellbore poorly defined, the en-
gineer will have to use the simulator to study the sensitivity of the
treatment design to such factors as damage depth, damaged-zone
permeability, injection rate, and type of diverting agent.
In designing an acidizing treatment with this model, one must
consider the constraints on the design that are independent of the
acid/rock interactions. In general, the maximum practical injection
rate and treating pressure will depend on the nature of the well com-
pletion and the mechanical properties of the formation. For example,
an excessive treating pressure could lead to fracturing of the for-
mation or damage to surface equipment or tubular goods; exces-
sively high injection rates could damage the integrity of a gravel
pack in such completions. When this model is used, these constraints
on maximum treating pressure and rate should be predetermined
from knowledge of the reservoir and the well completion and the
model exercised within these bounds.
Comparison of Treatment With and Without Diverting Agent.
It is logical that the model be used first to check the usefulness of
adding diverters in stimulating a well. Fig. 5 plots the overall stimu-
lation ratio, defined as the ratio of final to initial productivity of
the well, with productivity being the production rate per unit
52
pressure drop. The dashed line is the trend for acidization without
diverting agent; the solid line is the trend with continuous injection
of diverting agent. These results are for the case of constant total
injection rate. As shown, if the treatment goal is simply to increase
overall productivity, then the use of diverting agent is not recom-
mended unless a very large treatment volume is anticipated.
On the other hand, if the process is aimed at stimulating all layers,
diverting agent would aid in ensuring uniform acid distribution and
consequently a more even stimulation. This is evident from Fig.
6; the stimulation ratios of individual layers are almost equal when
diverting agent is used. In the absence of diverting agent, however,
acid will tend to enter the highest injectivity layer (Zone 2), thereby
increasing its permeability and triggering more flow into the layer.
This explains the better overall stimulation ratio for the case without
diverting agent because preferential acidization of the most
permeable layer translates into higher average permeability for a
parallel configuration. Diverters can also be beneficial in removing
damage from all layers. This is illustrated in Fig. 7, where the skin
factors of individual layers for treatment with diverting agent were
zero after 230 gallft [2.86 m 3 /m] of acid injection; without the
diverter, damage was removed from only one layer.
Effect of Depth of Damage. Because the only information available
is the overall skin factor, certain assumptions have to be made re-
garding the distribution and the extent of damage. As a first ap-
proximation, the individual skin factor for each layer can be taken
as equivalent to the overall value, which is 15. The depth of damage
can then be varied, with the permeability of this damaged region
adjusted correspondingly to keep skin factor constant. I I
The assumed depth of damage is a vital design parameter because
of its importance when the required treatment volume for a given
flow rate is matched. Unfortunately, the depth of damage is difficult
to estimate or to measure. A consideration of the damage mech-
anism may provide some insight into this parameter. For example,
if the damage mechanism is the interaction of the drilling-fluid
filtrate with the formation, an estimate of depth of damage can be
obtained from the fluid-loss characteristics of the drilling fluid. If
particle migration in the reservoir is the cause of damage, labo-
ratory tests to determine the velocities required for significant
damage may provide an estimate of depth of damage.
Effect of Injection Rate. The impact of injection rates on stimu-
lation results was investigated, assuming 6 in. [15.2 cm] of damage
SPE Production Engineering, February 1989
 o
1I'l
...;

• • • aT - 0.01 Ill/UIN/FT
... ... ... aT - 0.03 Ill/UIN/FT • • • aT - 0.01 IIl/WIN/F'T
+---<...--+1 aT - 0.05 Ill/uIN/n ... ... ... aT - 0.03 IIl/UIN/F'T
)1 " I( aT - 0.10 Ill/UIN/FT +-__<...--+1 aT - 0.05 Ill/UIN/f'T
)1 II IC aT - O. 10 Ill/UIN/F'T
o o
o
*------r-----,------~----_r----~ '"
°0~.-0-0-----5'O.-0-0----1'0-0-.0-0----,r50-.-00----',20-0-.-00--~250.00
-0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 ,200.00 250.00
INJECTION VOLUME, GAL 1FT INJECTION VOLUME. GAL 1FT

Fig. 8-Effect of Injection rate on stimulation ratio. Fig. 10-Dlvertlng efficiency-high a, high k.

a
o • • • aT - 0.10 88l/llIN/n
... ... ... aT - o. OS 88l/llIN/n
+----1"'--+1 aT - 0.03 88l/llIN/n
II k aT - 0.01 81l/llIN/n
o
III -0
zo a:":
o t.J0
H
I- >-
«
«
~o
...J
I-Ul
zo -l!l
t.J.
W 1-0
(,)
Z
«
~
o
(,)~ ...J
00
«0
H z'"
00
(,)
H
« I-
(,)
a «
'"o ~1I'l
1&..'"
o • • • aT - 0.01 Ill/WIN/F'T
... ... ... aT - O. 03 III lUI NIH
a ---<---+1 aT - 0.05 Sll/WIN/FT
a o )1 II K aT - O. 1 Ill/IIIN/n
°0~.-0-0-----4r.0~0~~~8'.~0·O=----,r2~.0·O--~'16-.-0-0--~20.00
'"
00+.-0-0-----50'.-0-0----,'0-0-.0-0----,'50-.-0-0---,,20-0-.-00--~250.00
DISTANCE FROM WELLBORE, INCHES
INJECTION VOLUME, GAL 1FT
Fig. 9-Varlatlon of acid penetration distance with Injection
rate. Fig. 11-Dlvertlng efficiency-Iowa, high k.

in all layers with model runs made in the presence of a diverting
agent. Higher injection rates were found to yield higher overall
stimulation ratios, as demonstrated in Fig. 8. There is a significant
reduction in stimulation ratio at the lowest rate of 0.01 bbllmin-ft
[0.087 X 10- 3 m 3 /s·ml This sensitivity to injection rates is caused
by the lack of acid penetration through the damaged zone when
injected at lower rates. The locations of the acid fronts in Zone
2, after 200 gal/ft [2.48 m 3 /m] has been injected, are shown in
Fig. 9. Rates equal to, or higher than, 0.03 bbl/min-ft [0.26 x 10- 3
m 3 /s·m] were able to penetrate the 6 in. [15.2 cm] of damage,
while at 0.01 bbllrnin-ft [0.087 x 10- 3 m 3 /s·m], the front still re-
mained within the damaged region.
Fig. 9 also suggests that 0.1 bbllmin-ft [0.87 x 10- 3 m 3 /s·m]
is the optimal rate at 200 gal/ft [2.48 m 3 /m] because at this rate
the acid front is almost perfectly matched to the damaged region.
Therefore, higher injection volumes may not drastically improve
stimulation. Note that the optimal value is also dependent on other
parameters, such as mineral and acid concentration, temperature,
and mineral type. For example, at a treatment temperature of 150°F
[66°C], the reaction-rate constant used for the fast mineral is 10.7
and for the slow mineral is 0.0046, where the units are (cm 3
rocklcm 3 bulk)(gmol HF/cm 3 acid)-sec, while at a normallabo-
ratory temperature of 75°F [24°C], the respective reaction-rate con-
stants are 1.5 and 0.0023. With a lower reaction rate, the optimal
injection rate will be lower than 0.1 bbl/min-ft [0.87 x 10- 3
m 3 Is· m] because the acid front will penetrate even more deeply
than the damaged region, thus dissolving the higher-permeability
virgin formation.
Again, remember that the maximum feasible injection rate during
an acidizing treatment is controlled by the mechanical properties

SPE Production Engineering, February 1989 53

 I/)

•0 _
III
..•
-_ _I QT - 0.01
_~_--..
.to .. QT - 0.03
+--1----+1 QT - 0.0t!
88L/IIIN/rr
BBL/IIIN/rr
88L/IIIN/rr
II ••
)f----101___" QT - O. 10 BBL/IIIN/rr
1.4
0 Diverting Agent Discontinued
o::~
wo 1.3
>- z
<
-J ~
:::J
W.
-..,
I/) III
III
uj
1.2
1-0 f-
< «
0:: a: 1.1
z

I
-J 0
<0
Z.., i=
0 1.0
00 w
H --..
I- ~ Diverting Agent Continued
0 ..J
<
0::1/)
lJ...N
g
f-
0.9

0 O.S

o 0.7
N a 50 100 150 200 250
00'.-O-O-----5~O-.-O-O----1~O-O-.O-0----lT5-0-.0-0---/-2TO-O.-O-O--~250.00
INJECTION VOLUME. GAL FT INJECTION VOLUME, GAUFT

Fig. 12-Diverting efficiency-low O!, low k. Fig. 13-Total injection rate for a pressure limit of 1,000 pSi.

of the formation and the well completion. Thus, the optimal in-
jection rate from the standpoint of the penetration distance of live
acid will not always be obtainable in practice.
Effect of Cake Resistance. So far, we have shown model results
for treatments using a diverting agent with relatively high specific
cake resistance, comparable in value to those computed for organic
resin diverting agents. Coupled with the high permeabilities of the
gulf coast reservoir, the diverting agent is expected to be very effi-
cient in aiding fluid placement. Regardless of injection rate,
diversion is extremely effective (see Fig. 10). The fractional flow
rate into Zone 1 almost immediately reached the value corresponding
to the thickness distributipn. Here, we examine the effect on
diversion efficiency and subsequently on stimulation results when
using a diverting agent having an ex value an order of magnitude
less than the previous one. We also discuss runs for a lower-
permeability reservoir, where the undamaged permeabilities are
k J =13 md, k2=47 md, and k3=10 md.
Figs. 11 and 12 show the fractional rate into Zone I for the high-
permeability (original case) and low-permeability cases, respec-
tively. Again, damage in all layers is 6 in. [15.2 cm]. As shown
in Fig. 11, diversion is still effective, even though the diverting
agent has a smaller ex value. Because formation permeabilities are
high, the imposed pressure drop is' still too low to have any signif-
icant impact on diverting-agent efficiency. In Fig. 12, however,
when the pressure drop in the formation becomes comparable to
or larger than the pressure drop across the cake, the amount of acid
injected into the lower-permeability layer is actually reduced during
the initial stages before increasing to the proper placement value
of 0.417. Furthermore, diversion is more effective at higher in-
jection. rates because of the dependence of fIlter-cake pressure drop
on rate.
Consideration of Pressure Limits. In many acidizing treatments,
injection rate is adjusted during the treatment so that a pressure
limitation is not exceeded. To simulate such treatments, the model
was modified to allow for a variable injection rate with a constant
wellbore pressure. Investigation was carried out on treatments ini-
tially conducted at constant injection rate until a ceiling BHP value,
(Pw)rnax, was reached, beyond which injection rate was allowed
to change while BHP was kept at this value. Stimulation after
(Pw)max was reached was examined for cases in which diverting-
agent injection was both continued and discontinued. In each case,
treatment results for the high- and low-permeability reservoirs were
compared. The ceiling pressure was chosen to be 1,000 psi [6895
kPa] above the initial wellbore pressure.
Fig. 13 shows the total injection rate for a case where diverting
agent was continued after (Pw)max was reached and for a case
where diverting agent was discontinued when (Pw)max was at-
tained. When diverting agent is continued, the total injection rate
declines after the pressure limit is reached because diverting agent
continues to cause additional pressure drop at the sandface. The
total injection rate increases after the pressure limit is reached when
the diverting agent is discontinued, because mineral dissolution con-
tinuously increases formation permeability. The stimulation results
were similar for both cases, and discontinuing the diverting agent
allows the treatment to be completed in a shorter time. Thus, there
appears to be no advantage in continuing diverting agent after effi-
cient diversion has been achieved.
Conclusions
1. A previously developed numerical model of the sandstone
acidizing process has been generalized, enabling it to simulate the
behavior of any particulate diverting agent and to handle multiple
sequences of fluids injected at constant rates and/or constant BHP's.
2. Filtration theory was used to model diverting-agent behavior.
Interpretation methods for commonly run tests were presented that
can be used to characterize various types of diverting agent.
3. Stimulation results are sensitive to the assumed depth of
damage. When the damage is deeper than the penetration distance
of live acid, the highest practical injection rate is preferable (the
highest rate that will not damage the well completion or fracture
the formation); for shallow damage (assumed depth <6 in. [< 15.2
em]), lower injection rates may be optimal.
4. There is no advantage in continued injection of diverting agent
after efficient diversion has been achieved.
Nomenclature
A = cross-sectional area of fIlter medium, L2
Asp = specific surface area of a particle, L2/L3
Cda = concentration of diverting agent, L3/L3
Fs = shape and size factor
gc = gravitational constant
kcore = core permeability, L2
L = core length, L
mtkJ = mass of diverting agent, M

54 SPE Production Engineering, February 1989

 (Pw)max = maximum allowable wellbore pressure, M/Lt2 5. Crowe, C.W.: "Evaluation of Oil Soluble Resin Mixture as Diverting
IIp = total pressure drop, M/Lt 2 Agents for Matrix Acidizing, " paper SPE 3505 presented at the 1971
SPE Annual Meeting, New Orleans, Oct. 3-6.
llpc = pressure drop in cake, M/Lt2 6. Houchin, L.R. et al.: "Evaluation of Oil-Soluble Resin as an Acid-
llPct = total pressure drop in cake, M/Lt2 Diverting Agent," paper SPE 15574 presented at the 1986 SPE Annual
q = flow rate, L3 It Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 5-6.
q 0 = flow rate before cake deposition, L3 It 7. Taha, R., Hill, A.D., and Sepehrnoori, K.: "Simulation of Sandstone
Matrix Acidizing in Heterogeneous Reservoirs," JPT (July 1986)
t = time, t
753-67.
u = flux, L 3/L 2 t 8. Grace, H.P.: "Resistance and Compressibility of Filter Cakes, Part
V = injection volume, L3 I," Chern. Eng. Prog. (June 1953) 49, No.6, 303-18.
Vp = volume of a cake particle, L3 9. Ruth, B.F., Montillon, G.H., and Montana, R.E.: "Studies in Filtration,
ex = specific cake resistance, LIM I: Critical Analysis of Filtration Theory," Ind. & Eng. Chern. (Jan.
1933) 25, No. 1,76-82.
JL = fluid viscosity, MiLt
10. Bird, R.B., Stewart, S.E., and Lightfoot, E.N.: Transport Phenomena,
Pp = density of bed particle, M/L3 John Wiley & Sons, New York City (1960) 47.
cf> c = porosity of cake, L3 IV II. Earlougher, R.C. Jf.: Advances in Well Test Analysis, Monograph
Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1977) 5, 8.
Acknowl~dgments
We thank the sponsors of the Stimulation, Logging, and Formation 51 Metric Conversion Factors
Damage Research Program at the U. of Texas at Austin for their °API 141.5/(131.5 + ° API) g/cm 3
financial support of this work. bbl x 1.589 873 E-Ol m3
ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
References OF (OF-32)/1.8 °C
1. Pye, D.S., Gallus, J.P., and Kemp, J.D.: "Placement Control Boosts gal x 3.785412 E-03 m3
Well Stimulation Results," Oil & Gas J. (Nov. 9, 1970) 76-80. in. x 2.54* E+OO cm
2. Doerler, N. and Prouvost, L.P.: "Diverting Agents: Laboratory Study Ibf x 4.448222 E+OO N
and Modelling of Resultant Zone Injectivities," paper SPE 16250 Ibm x 4.535924 E-Ol kg
presented at the 1987 SPE IntI. Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, San psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa
Antonio, Feb. 4-6.
3. Hill, A.D. and Galloway, PJ.: "Laboratory and Theoretical Modeling • Conversion factor is exact. SPEPE
of Organic Resin Diverting Agent Behavior," JPT (Dec. 1977) 1657-63.
4. King, G.E. and Hollingsworth, F.H.: "Evaluation of Diverting Agent
Effectiveness and Cleanup Characteristics Using a Dynamic Laboratory
Model-High Permeability Case," paper SPE 8400 presented at the Original SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 27, 1987. Paper accepted for publication
July 26, 1988. Revised manuscript received Au~. 15, 1988. Paper (SPE 16885) first
1979 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, presented at the 1987 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas,
Sept. 23-26. Sept. 27-30.

SPE Production Engineering, February 1989 55