Advanced Acid Stimulation Techniques

Presented By: Mr. Mahmoud Farag Radwan

1st Batch: 30 May - 03 June 2022
2nd Batch: 27 June - 01 July 2022

1
 Presenter Name:
Mahmoud Farag Radwan

Mahmoud Radwan is a Subsurface & Integrity Operations Dept. Head at AMAL

Petroleum Company (AMAPETCO) with more than 14 years of experience in oil & gas
industry. Mahmoud worked in Well Engineering, Intervention, Integrity & Work-over at
Short several companies, including KDT Global Solutions, Badr El-Din Pet. Co. (BAPETCO),
Biography Qarun Pet. Co. (QPC) and Wadi El-Sahel Petroleum Co. (WASPETCO).
Also, a freelance instructor at upstream Oil & Gas in Egypt & GCC since 2008.
Mahmoud received a BSc degree in Petroleum Engineering from Al-Azhar University in
2007.

 Evaluating Sustainable Annulus Pressure (SAP) in Sour Wells and the Possible
Causes to Avoid Recurrence to the Well Integrity Annual Middle East Conference in
Abu Dhabi; UAE in Apr 2015
 Implementing NDT methods for maintenance and inspection to the Asset Integrity
Management North Africa Conference in Cairo; Egypt in Nov 2015
 Feasibility Evaluation of Using Downhole Gas-water Separation Technology in gas
Reservoirs with Bottom Water; paper number: SPE-183739-MS to the 20th Middle East
Publications Oil & Gas Show and Conference in Mar 2017 http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/183739-MS
 Managing the Operational Challenges in Corroded Wells through Well Integrity
Management System to the Improving Brownfield Performance Technical
Convention, in Cairo; Egypt in Dec 2019
 Safe and Economic Attractive Rigless Operations Using a Digital Slickline in
Unmanned Platform with Low Structure Loads and Spacing; paper number: SPE--
202857-MS to the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference
(ADIPEC) in Nov 2020 http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/183739-MS
 COURSE CONTENTS

 Module 1: Formation Damage

 Module 2: Stimulation Concepts and Objectives
 Module 3: Types of Acid and Acid Formulations
 Module 4: Types of Acid and Acid Formulations
(Cont'd)
 Module 5: Monitoring, Execution, Evaluation and
Follow-Up

3
Module 1

Formation Damage
 High permeability,
High Oil & Gas Saturation
and High PI
Reservoir but Low
Production Rate!!!

5
What is formation
damage?!!!!!

6
 Altered Zone and Skin Effect
2,000
Pressure, psi

1,500

1,000
Dps

500
1 10 100 1,000 10,000
Distance from center of wellbore, ft
7
 • Occurs as produced reservoir fluids
move through the reservoir.
Natural

• Is the result of external operations

and fluids in the well, such as drilling,
well completion, workover operations
Induced or stimulation treatments.

8
 Formation Damage Workflow

Prediction Prevention

Monitoring
Remediation

9
Formation Damage Throughout
Well Life Cycle

10
 Formation Damage
 Damage Characterization
 Types, origin, location and causes of
damage
 Diagnosis
 Treatments
 Damage Removal & Prevention
o Methods
o Chemistry

11
Damage Characterization
 Fines Migration  Induced Particles
 Swelling Clays Solids
LCM/Kill Fluids
 Scale Deposits
Precipitates
 Organic Deposits
 Oil Based Mud
Paraffins
Asphaltenes
 Emulsion Block

 Mixed Deposits  Wettability Changes

 Bacteria  Water Block

12
Areas of Damage

Tubing Gravel Pack Perforations Formation

Scales

Organic deposits

Silicates, Aluminosilicates

Emulsion

Water block

Wettability change

13
 Damage Sample Testing and Diagnosis
START No No
Yes
Organics Yes Yes Yes
No
Yes

No Yes
Yes

No
No

Yes No
Yes

Yes No
Yes

14
 Module 2

Stimulation Concepts and Objectives

16
 What’s matrix stimulation job?
A chemical treatment injected radially from the
wellbore beyond the (critical) matrix at a pressure
below the frac pressure

To bypass To remove
formation formation
damage damage

Carbonate Sandstone

17
Remove vs. Bypass Damage
Solubility in Acid
Constituent Sandstone Carbonate
Framework No Yes
Cementation Material Yes Yes
Porosity
Secondary
Cement Quartz
(Carbonate Quartz)
*Feldspars
Clays *Chert
Pore lining *Mica
i.e., illite
Clays

Pore filling Remaining

i.e., Kaolinite Pore Space

18
19
Reality Check
…Good News is Bad News…
 Matrix treatment economic success rate < 50%
 ROI higher for Matrix vs. Fracturing
 Low job cost & high production increase potential
Operators report:
 25 to 50% of their wells have significant damage
- Will not treat due to:
 Not aware of the potential benefit
 Management won’t take risk
 Operational mistakes

20
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Workflow

21
22
 Applications for Matrix
Treatments

• Reservoirs with formation damage

• Drilling mud invasion, silt and clay migration damage,
scale, organic deposits, etc.
• Gravel packed or Frac-Packed wells
• Mechanical treating limitations
• Water/Gas contact nearby
• Remove damage in a conventional propped fracture
• Economic($): Propped fracture treatments are 5 to 6
times more expensive than matrix treatments.

23
 STIMULATION DECISION TREE
WELL IS VALID CANDIDATE FOR STIMULATION

NEGATIVE SKIN REQUIRED TO SLIGHTLY POSITIVE SKIN

YIELD ADEQUATE PRODUCTION YIELDS ADEQUATE PRODUCTION

SANDSTONE OR CARBONTE? MATRIX TREAMENT

SANDSTONE CARBONATE SANDSTONE CARBONATE

PROPPED MATRIX TREATMENT TO REMOVE TREATMENT TO BYPASS
FRACTURE PROPPED FRAC DAMAGE DAMAGE
ACID FRAC

MECHANICAL MECHANICAL MECHANICAL

LIMITATIONS LIMITATIONS LIMITATIONS

ECONOMICS EVALUATION ECONOMICS EVALUATION

ECONOMICS EVALUATION
FOR:

DISQUALIFIED
MATRIX PROPPED FRAC ACID FRAC
CANDIDATE
TREATMENT
EVALUATE
MATRIX TREATMENT

DISQUALIFIED DISQUALIFIED DISQUALIFIED

EVALUATE EVALUATE EVALUATE
PROPPED FRAC MATRIX MATRIX
ACID FRAC ACID FRAC PROPPED FRAC

Hydraulically fractured gravel packed wells may exhibit a slighltly positive skin (0-2)
24
 Module 3

Types of Acid and Acid Formulations

26
27
28
 Fracture
acid
stimulation

Matrix
Mud acid
Acidization

Acid
Stimulation
Techniques
Selective Matrix
Acidization Acidization

Foamed Nitrified
Acid acid

29
 Wellbore Treatment Procedures
(Placement of the Acid Across Interval)

Jetting Soaking Washing

30
 Types of Acid Systems

Hydrochloric Hydrochloric-Hydrofluoric
(Carbonates) Mud Acid (HF)
(Sandstones)

Organic ETDA
(Acetic, Formic) (Ethylene Diamine Tetra-
(high Temp, Alloy tubing) Acetic Acid)
(Carbonates) (Carbonates)

31
 Carbonate vs. Sandstone
SANDSTONE CARBONATE

Dissolution of the A large fraction of the matrix is

damaging mineral soluble (>50%)

A small fraction of the Dissolution of rock (wormholes)

matrix is dissolved damage bypass

Precipitation Diversion
dissolution + precipitations penetration + coverage

32
Sandstone Constituents

Secondary
Cement Quartz
(Carbonate
Quartz)
*Feldspars
Clays
(Pore lining
i.e., illite)
*Chert
Clays
(Pore filling
i.e., Kaolinite) *Mica

Remaining
Pore Space

33
Formation Minerals - Silicates
Minerals Chemical Composition

Quartz Quartz Si02

Orthocose Si3Al08K
Microcline

Feldspars Albite Si3Al03KNa

Plagioclase Si2-3Al1-203(Na,Ca)

Micas Biotite (AlSi3010) K(Mg, Fe)3(0H)2

Muscovite (AlSi3010) K(Al)20H) 2

Clays Kaolinite Al4(Si4 010)(0H)8

Illite Si4-cAlc 010 (0H)2KcAl2
Smectite (AlSi3 010)Mg5(Al,Fe)(0H)8
Mixed-Layer Kaolinite, Illite or Chlorite, Smectite

34
Formation Minerals
Chemical
Minerals Composition

Carbonates Calcite CaC03

Dolomite Ca, Mg(C03)2
Ankerite Ca,(Mg,Fe)(C03) 2
Siderite FeC03

Sulfates Gypsum CaS04·2H20

Anhydrite CaS04

Others Halite NaCl

Iron Oxides

35
Sandstone Acidizing

 Sedimentary rock consisting of sand

(framerock) in a matrix of silt and clay
 Actual composition varies but can have
high concentrations of silt and clay.
 Silicates normally not attacked by HCl
 Hydrofluoric acid attacks silicates
quartz, feldspar, clays…

36
Reaction Rate - Factors
 Mineral Composition & Surface Area
 Dominant Factor « Surface Area
Mineral Specific Area

2
Quartz Few cm /g

2
Feldspar Few cm /g

2
Clays: Kaolinite 22 m /g
2
Illite 113 m /g
2
Smectite 82 m /g

 Reaction Rate: Clays > Feldspars > Quartz

37
 Reactions
 Primary Reaction: HF + mineral + HCl  AlFx + H2SiF6
Presence of Ca will cause CaF2 ppt. Na and K can create
alkali-fluosilicates and alkali fluoaluminates.
 Secondary Reaction: H2SiF6 + mineral + HCl  silica gel + AlFx
Driving force is the greater affinity of fluorine for aluminum
Silica gel formation (precipitation) is well documented but not
a significant problem
Slower than primary reaction
 Tertiary Reaction: AlFx + mineral  AlFy + silica gel; x > y
Driving force is greater stability of AlFy
Much slower than secondary reaction
Very slow unless above 200 deg. F

38
Acid Reactions

Mineral Precipitates Preventative Action

(1) CaCO CaF MgF Preflush

3 2& 2
CaMg (CO ) HC1
3 2
(2) Silica-Brine Na SiF Preflush
2 6
K SiF HCl, NH Cl
2 6 4
(3) Clay (Clean) S0 Overflush
2
MM-K*
(4) K-Feldspar K SiF Low concentration HF
2 6
(orthoclase) 1.5%

Na-Feldspar Na SiF Maximum 3% HF

2 6
(albite)

* MM - Montmorillonite (Smectite)
K - Kaolinite

39
Acid Reactions

Mineral Precipitate Preventive

s Action
(5) Clay (Dirty)

(a) Illite
K SiF Start low zone. HF
2 0
MgF (Finish w/3% if small
2
Si0 amount of clay.)
2
(b) Chlorite - Fe(OH) Sequester preflush
3
(Iron rich) acid or blend acetic
acid

* MM - Montmorillonite (Smectite)
K - Kaolinite

40
Matrix Stimulation: Sandstone Stages

Fluids @ End of
Treatment??

4 3 2 1

41
 Volume Considerations
 Pre-Acid Preflush
3% NH4Cl - 1.5 Tubing Volumes
 Acid Preflush
HCl Volume Selection Guide
 Main Stage
Mud Acid - 3-4 feet radial penetration
 Overflush
5% HCl, 3% NH4Cl or N2 - 3-4 feet radial penetration
 Spacer for Clay Acid
3% NH4Cl - 1-2 feet penetration
 Clay Acid Stage
3-4 feet radial penetration
 Displacement Fluid
3% NH4Cl - 2 bbls short of top perforation

42
 HCl Preflush/Overflush
HCl Fluid Selection Guide for All Temperatures

>100 md 20-100 md <20 md

<10% silt and <10% clay 15X 10X 7.5X

all other combinations of

silt and clay composition 10X 7.5X 5X

<4% chlorite/glauconite, use < 20md Guidelines for HCl.

4-6% chlorite/glauconite, use <20md Guidelines for HCl with 5% Acetic Acid in PF/OF
6-8% chlorite/glauconite, use 10% Acetic Acid PF/OF to Mud Acid with 5% L400
>8% chlorite/glauconite, use 10% Acetic Acid and Organic Mud Acid (Formic/HF)
<2% Zeolite, use 10% Acetic Acid in HCl PF/OF with 5% Acetic Acid in Mud Acid
2-5% Zeolite, use 10% Acetic Acid as PF/OF with 10% Acetic Acid in Mud Acid.
>5% Zeolite, use 10% Acetic Acid as PF/OF to 10% Citric Acid/HF

43
Mud Acid Selection Guide

Mud Acid Fluid Selection Guide For All Temperatures

> 100 md 20-100 md < 20 md
< 10% silt and < 10% clay 12 - 3 8-2 6 - 1.5
> 10% silt and > 10% clay 13.5 - 1.5 9-1 4.5 - .5
> 10% silt and < 10% clay 12 - 2 9 - 1.5 6-1
< 10% silt and > 10% clay 12 - 2 9 - 1.5 6-1

44
 Clay Acid:
a retarded Mud Acid

fused clay
after treatment

45
• Limited HF available ==> deeper penetration

• 0.1 – 0.2 % HF available at one time

• 2% HF equivalent

• Clay fusion
• The probability of fluosilicates or silica
precipitates is decreased tremendously

46
 Sandstone Acidizing Conclusions
1. Damage identification determines the types of acid and other solvents to
use in a sandstone acidizing treatment.
2. A knowledge of the chemical reactions involved between acids with
formation minerals and connate fluids provide some guidelines for acid
types, concentrations, and sequence to prevent or reduce precipitation of
insoluble reaction products.
3. The selection of appropriate types and volumes of preflushes and
overflushes also help prevent incompatibilities between formation fluids
and acid systems.
4. A numerical simulator should be used to quantify acid volumes although
simple guidelines are provided to assist in the selection of treatment
volumes.
5. The most important factor in successful acid stimulation is to provide
clean and filtered acids at the perforations by filtering all fluids and acid
cleaning (“pickling”) the tubing before the acid treatment is injected into
the formation.
6. Evaluating the executed acid treatment provides information to improve
subsequent acid treatments in the same or similar formations.

47
Matrix Stimulation of Carbonates
Injection of acid results in the formation of highly
conductive flow channels called wormholes.
• Enlarge pore spaces and
dissolve particles plugging these
spaces
• Increase near-wellbore
permeability within a few to as
many as 10 ft of the wellbore
Wormholes
• Effective stimulation relies on
r ’e = ?
deep penetration of wormholes

48
 Key Factors in Carbonate Acidizing
1. Penetration

2. Acid reactivity

3. Injection rates

4. Diversion

49
 Impact of Pump Rate and Temperature

Increasing Increasing
Pump Rate Temperature

Reaction rate can be too high even with Organic Acids at high temperature.

50
 Acidizing Additives
 Inhibitors
 Surfactants
 Foaming Agents
 Mutual Solvents
 Antisludge Agents
 Non-Emulsifiers
 Iron Control
 Friction Reducers
 Clay Control
 Diverters
 Specialty Additives

51
 Bullheading or CT?
Bullheading through Production Tubing
 Cheap (no CT needed)
 Complete zonal coverage difficult in longer intervals
 Diversion needed in longer intervals
 BH results in non-uniform treatments
 Acid will spent on iron scales in tubing
 Tubing scale (rust), pipe dope, etc. transported with acid into formation  more
damage!
Coiled Tubing
 Some control over placement
 Clean tubing! No iron scales, pipe dope etc.
 Allows circulation of fluids back to surface
 Limited pump rate (< 3 bpm in 1” CT)
 Not beyond 5000 ft of CT (too weak)

52
53
54
Fluid Placement

Successful matrix
treatments require uniform
treating fluid distribution

55
 Common Placement Techniques
Mechanical Methods
 Ball sealers
 Straddle packers
 CT, inflatable packers

Bridging and Matrix Diverter Agents

Salts

Chemical
for carbonates, best
 Liquid Chemical Diversion
 Foam Diversion

56
 Advantages and Disadvantages
 Advantages
Less sensitive to chemical composition of fluid
Sandstones
Less sensitive to temperature and
Effective interval isolation carbonates

 Disadvantages
Workover rig
Special equipment
Effective isolation throughout the treatment
No gravel pack
No open hole
Operational risks

57
 Ball Sealers Packers

conventional buoyant
density ball sealer
ball sealer

58
 Matrix Diverters and Bridging Agents
History
 Soaps (1936)
 Cellophane flakes Sandstones and
 Naphthalenes (1954)
tight carbonates

 Rock Salt
 Wax-Polymer Blends
 Hydrocarbon Resins

59
Fluid Diversion
ACID

 Slug diversion DIVERTER

(in acid or
brine)

ACID

 Continuous Diversion
DIVERTER
(in acid)

60
 Advantages
No rigs
No downhole tools
Open hole
Harmless
No operational risks

 Disadvantages
Compatibility
Careful design to match rock pore size distribution
Temperature sensitive
Solubility

61
Limitation of Bridging Agents

62
3. Chemical Diverters
 Problem: Fissured carbonates, highly permeable
formations, where bridging and matrix diverters don’t
work
 In-depth diversion

 Best approach

63
Guidelines for Staged Diversion †
Perforated Acid Diverter
interval stages stages Design
(ft) (ft)

20 2 1 10
40 3 2 15
60 3 2 20
80 4 3 20
100 5 4 20
125 5 4 25
150 6 5 25
† Advanced service module - acidizing

64
 Benefits of Foam Diversion
 High water-cut wells

 Non-damaging diverter system is used

 Effective

 Only option for low-P wells

 Standard products and equipment

65
 Module 5

Monitoring, Execution, Evaluation and Follow-Up

Laboratory Studies
LOCAL REGIONAL

Acid Strength
Flow Test ( ARC )
Acid Solubility
Scale Analysis X-Ray Analysis
Water Analysis SEM, EDAX Study
Water Sensitivity Test Thin-Section
Emulsion & Sludge Tests

Porosity & Permeability

Measurement

67
Acid Strength

 Hydrometer
If no weighting agent is present, density is proportional to acid
concentration

 Titration
Most reliable

68
Solubility Tests
1 gram core sample in 100 ml acid @ 150oF for 1 hr

 HCl solubility (15%) = carbonate content

 Mud Acid (12:3) solubility = carbonate & fines content

Clay Acid if HCl solubility is > 20%

 Other minerals and scales

69
Scale Identification & Organic Deposits

 Scale identification
XRD
Chemical Analysis

 Organic Deposits
Asphalt and Paraffin
Evaluate crude production for % Asphalt
and paraffin content
Solvents for Dissolution

70
Water Analysis

71
Porosity & Permeability Measurement

 Cores are used from the well in question or offset wells.

 Porosity:
Different techniques used for figuring interconnected porosity.

 Permeability:
K is most often determined to N2 gas using a gas permeameter.

72
Emulsions
 Emulsions:
A mixture of two normally
immiscible fluids.
Emulsifying Agents our naturally
occurring in crude oils.
 Treatment:
Prevention (mutual solvents and
surfactants)
Test treatment fluids + additives
with formation fluids prior to
pumping.
Methodology followed for emulsion
removal and prevention.

73
 Emulsion Tests

 General Procedure:
Generate Emulsion tank shaking with crude or brine.
When testing acids, use all additives.
Vol. Emulsion Remaining
% Breakout = 100% - x 100
Vol. of Test Oil

 Record % Breakout Vs. Time

Emulsion

 Emulsion Types: Water

Water in Oil (WO)

Oil in Water (OW)

74
 Sludge Testing
 Sludge
Chemically complex heavy fractions in crude.
Higher Acid concentration greater tendency to form sludge.
 General Procedure
Filter crude through 20 mesh
Mix 50 cc of Acid + all additives with 50 cc of crude
Agitate 1 min.
Place in water bath at temp. for minimum of 4 hours.
Pour through wire screen. Observe presence of sludge?
 Prevention
Surfactants

75
76
X-Ray Diffraction
 Reveals:
 Crystalline material

 Can identify crystalline

scale

 Accurate qualitative
description

77
SEM / EDAX
 SEM:
Large Range of Focus:
20x to 80,000x
Excellent Depth of Focus
Allows us to see the rock's
make-up, including clays.
 EDAX:
Similar to XRD, allows for
qualitative mineral ID.
Pin Point Elemental
Analysis

78
 Well Pressure
Logs Core Data
Schematic Data

Evaluated as an acidizing candidate

using
Nodal Analysis,

Mechanical Acidizing Liquid

No Yes
Problems Required Samples
Yes

Matrix Design Process

Lab
Analysis

Treatment Fluid Design

using
EXpert System or
Simulators
How do the fluids
affect clean-up

Design Is the
CHEMISTRY
Good
No Equipment
Constrants

Process
1st Treatment requirements
Yes 2nd Location requirements
3rd Fluid System Calculate
1Fluid 1Stage Clean-up
2Fluid 2Stage Flow Rate
3Fluid 3Stage
Prepare
Pump Equipment and
the Materials
JOB Instruct Personnel
Record
Monitor the
Job
Yes
Finish Clean-up
Treatment Job Process
Prameters Alter Job Execution
Execution
No

Review and reference

for future work

79
 Maximum Injection Rate

4.917 x 10-6 kh (FG x d - D ps - p)

qmax = r
mb ln r e + S
w

q = Injection rate (BPM)

k = Undamaged permeability (md)
h = net height of the formation (ft)
FG = fracture gradient (psi/ft)
Dps = margin (200-500) psi
m = viscosity of injected fluid (cp)
s = skin factor
p = pore pressure (psi)
re = drainage radius (ft)
rw = wellbore radius (ft)
B = formation volume factor (RB/ST)

80
 Maximum Surface Pressure

Ps = FG x d - ph + pf
Ps = Surface Pressure (psi)
FG = Fracture Gradient (psi/ft)
d = True Vertical Depth (ft)
Ph = Hydrostatic Pressure (psi)
Pf = Pipe Friction Pressure (psi)

81
 Exceeding Fracture Pressure

Jobs pumped at Jobs pumped at

less than pressures equal to
estimated or greater than
Well fracturing estimated
Type pressure fracturing pressure

No. %succ. No. % succ.

Oil Wells 11 64 9 0

Gas Wells 8 88 7 14

Water Injection 6 100 0 --

Wells
Total 25 80 16 6

82
Economic Evaluation

 Calculated Parameters
ROR - rate of return
ROI - return on investment
NPV - net present value
Payout - with or without cost of $$
Unit Cost - per barrel of oil equivalent
 Predicted production can be chance weighted
 All parameters a function of time interval evaluated

83
Applied Software
Learning Module

84
85
85