DEPARTAMENTO GEOLOGIA E PETRÓLEO

FACULDADE ENGENHARIA CIÊNCIA E TECNOLOGIA

UNIVERSIDADE NACIONAL TIMOR LOROSA’E

Grupo 10
Unstable Formations and Sand Control,

NOME DO GRUPO:
1. Pedro C.F. Foni (2020.02.05.055)
2. Placido da Costa (2020.02.05.056)
3. Rosália Anace Porumau (2020.02.05.057)
4. Rosalina Araujo(2020.02.05.058)

2023
 INTRODUÇÃO

A produção de areia de reservatórios (relativamente) não consolidados é um problema operacional caro e

frequentemente encontrado, que tem um impacto significativo no caso da operação do poço e na
economia da produção de petróleo ou gás.

Este capítulo irá:

• Descrever o processo mecânico da rocha que leva à produção de areia,
• Discutir o que constitui um problema de produção de areia do ponto de vista dos operadores de
produção,
• Indique as medidas operacionais tomadas para identificar se um poço pode esperar um poço com
problema de areia,
• Descrever os vários tipos de controle de areia (telas / prepacks / cascalho / fraturamento) e sua
instalação.
 
 
 TYPES OF SAND PRODUCTION

The determination of the sand production

potential of a given completion is difficult
because because of complex mechanism(s)
that result in formation failure and sand
production (Figure 1). Formulation of the
problem is difficult.
This has been observed in the field - beaning the well back to
reduce the production rate is a field proven method to
temporarily alleviate problems caused by wells suddenly
producing sand (Figure 2).

Sand production is a two stage process:

1) Failure of the rock
2) 2) Transport of the failed material into the wellbore
 A Southern North Sea Case History
Gas production was initiated from this Rotligindes gas reservoir in 1971. All the wells on the
platform started producing sand in 1976 at a FBHP of around 2,600 psi.

The following sand control strategy was developed over the next 8 years:
• Avoid perforating the weakest rock
• Ensure wells are beaned up slowly
• “Pre-condition” all sand prone wells prior to the (high rate) winter production season by producing them
to an acceptably low sand production rate at a lower FBHP than is expected to be reached during the
forthcoming winter season
• The sand production will then stop once the production rate is decreased (FBHP is increased) below the
“Pre-conditioning” level
 "Continuous" Sand Production

Very soft formations may exhibit sand production at the time of initial discovery - the so called “sloughing” sands can lead
to great difficulties during completion operations when hole collapse can become a major problem

Many other, normally somewhat more consolidated formations,

begin to show sand production after a considerable period of
production - due to reservoir pressure depletion (decrease in
minimum in-situ stress), water production, increased fluid
velocities etc. (see Figure 2).
 “Clean-up” sand production:

Continuous sand production - as discussed above - has to be distinguished from: This refers to (relatively minor amounts) of
sand that are produced from a new well during its first few days of production.

The time required for stabilisation to occur is dependent on the

type of well - gas wells responding more quickly than light oil
wells, which, in turn, respond faster than heavy oil wells
(Figure 3).
A new burst of sand production is observed each time the well's
production is increased (beaned up). This is thought to be due to
mobilisation of previously failed sand that was not produced
into the well by the previous (lower) production rate or
formation of a stable arch around the entrance to a perforation
cavity (Figure 4).
The individual perforation cavities may merge into a larger
cavity, which may also stabilise (Figure 5).The formation of a
large cavity means that the casing is no longer fully supported
by the formation. Complete loss of the well due to casing failure
then becomes a very real possibility. A residual, constant level
of solids production may continue once a stable arch has been
formed. This is discussed in the next section.
  “Fines” Production

Sand production relates to the production of load bearing formation solids while "fines" production involves the production
of mobile, very small, solids which are not part of the mechanical structure of the formation.

 Sand Cementation

Sandstone formations were originally laid down as a bed of loose sand grains at the bottom of a river, or as a beach at the
sea shore. Over geological time these individual, loose grains became cemented or consolidated together - a process
which resists sand production

The “overburden load” (or weight of all the sediments on top of

the formation) is resisted by the strength of the individual sand
grains, the pressure of the fluids within the pore spaces and the
strength imparted to the consolidated formation by these
intergranular cements (Figure 6).
 When is Sand Production a Problem?

The well’s sand production tendency may change during the lifetime of the well. In particular, what was a negligible or
marginal problem may become much more severe late in field life due to:
A) Water Production.
B) Production Plans
C) Production Plans

• The Consequences of Sand Production • Living With Sand Production

Sand production has numerous technical, A sand management system has to be installed if the
environmental, operational and economic “living with sand” option is chosen. Further, the
consequences: The operationally acceptable level of production system may be changed so that it becomes
sand production will vary with the location, the more tolerant of the volumes of sand that are
well, production facility design and local produced.
conditions. The effects of sand on production
operations and the potential safety, financial and
environmental consequences will influence whether
sand production limits are set and their level
 Monitoring of Sand Production

The various techniques used for monitoring sand production are summarised in Table 3. This table indicates
the measurement principle employed, its key points and the associated drawbacks.
 PREDICTION OF SAND FAILURE
A number of techniques have been employed when deciding whether to install sand exclusion techniques.
These include:
• Field experience
• Petrophysical log and core analysis
• Wellsite rock strength estimation
• Rock mechanical measurements and calculation
 Field Experience
The production history of wells producing from the same
formation in the field where the new well is planned is the
best guide as to whether sand control should be installed.
Alternatively the same formation may be found in a nearby
field with the same geological history
 Petrophysical Analysis
Laboratory measurements on core material from the same
geological section Petrophysical Analysis Laboratory
measurements on core material from the same geological
section ypically show that correlations in the form of a trend
line can be drawn through a cloud of data points. This
inexactness is due to the heterogeneity of the formation
properties and the errors in the measurements themselves. I
ypically show that correlations in the form of a trend line can
be drawn through a cloud of data points. This inexactness is
due to the heterogeneity of the formation properties and the
errors in the measurements themselves.
In general:
• The sonic travel time (DT, ms / ft) or, more correctly, the
sonic slowness is related to the porosity i.e. the higher the
porosity, the longer the travel time (Figure 9)
• The rock strength (as measured by an unconfined
compressive strength test or thick wall cylinder collapse test -
see rock mechanical tests, section 7.3.3) is inversely related to
porosity (Figure 9), i.e. the lower the porosity, the greater the
rock strength.
  Rock Strength Measurement

• On Site Strength Estimation

The simplest approach is attributed to D. Sparlin who stated that “a potential sand problem can be expected if the core is friable
(finger nail makes groove) or weaker”.

• Rock Mechanical Strength Measurements

A number of rock mechanical tests are used to characterise the

rock. They include

Unconfined Compressive Strength An unsupported cylinder of

rock with a length to diameter ratio of at least 2:1 and a plan
parallel end is loaded axially at a steady rate of between 0.5 - 5
MPa/min to failure (Figure 10).
• Brinell Hardness Number

The Brinell Hardness Number (BHN) is the load required to

press a standard spherical indenter a constant distance into a
core face (Figure 11). The stronger the rock, the greater the load
required and the higher the BHN. The BHN) measurement is
rock mechanical methods discussed here and does not destroy
the core material that is tested.

• Thick Wall Cylinder Collapse Strength

A hollow, thick wall cylinder is created by drilling a narrow

hole in the middle of a rock cylinder similar to that described in
the unconfined compressive strength test. A rubber sleve is
mounted around the outside of the cylinder which is then
installed between two end caps (Figure 12).
• Triaxial Rock Strength Measurement

This is the most sophisticated of the rock mechanical tests that will be discussed here. A cylinder of rock is mounted in a sleeve.
The axial stress (sa ) - imposed by the end pieces - and the radial stress (sr ) are controlled separately. The axial strain is measured
by strain gauges. Figure 14 shows that the maximum axial stress reached prior to failure increases as the radial stress is increased
i.e. the rock sample shows stronger behaviour as the confinement stress increases

Much more information can be derived about the strength

properties of the rock from this test compared to those described
earlier - this is illustrated in Figure 15, where the various phases
of rock failure under influence of the imposed stresses are
illustrated.
 SAND EXCLUSION

There are essentially two types of sand exclusion:

• Mechanical techniques where “gravel” particles, a few times larger than the formation sand grains, are used to retain the
formation in place by forming a filter through which the formation sand cannot pass. The gravel is itself held in place by a
screen which has been sized so that it in turn can not pass through the gaps (Figure 18). In its simplest form, the gravel is
omitted and the screen alone “holds back” the formation.

• Chemical Techniques where a chemical cement increases the strength of the formation while retaining a permeable pore
structure.
The various types of sand control are illustrated in Figure 18. These will all be described in detail in the next chapters.
However, one can deduce from this Figure that their installation is a complex process, which would only be entered into if the
alternative, allowing the tubing or casing to fill with sand were not a practical proposition. The following exercise shows that
this is not a practical option; even if the sand fill in the tubing is only 1m deep
An estimate of the oil flow through a 100 cm long sand bridge in a 3.5 in OD tubing when there is a
100 bar pressure drop across it can be calculated using Darcy’s Law for single phase, incompressible
flow in porous media.

If the gravitational effects are neglected:

Q = k A ∆P L (1)

where :
Q = flow rate of fluid
A = Tubing Cross Sectional Area
m = fluid viscosity
L = Length of Sand bridge
k = Permeability of sand in the bridge
DP = Pressure Drop across the sand bridge
The permeability of most formations are less than 3 Darcies, so it is reasonable to assume the
sand bridge permeability of 1 & 10 Darcies. The tubing ID is typically 2.6 in or 6.6 cm and we
will assume that the oil has the same viscosity as water (1 cp). Substituting in Equation 1 gives:

Even though all the assumptions made have been optimistic in terms of maximising the
flow through the sand bridge (high permeability and available pressure drop (100 bar, low
fluid viscosity); the resulting oil production is low.
 Different Types of Mechanical Sand exclusion
• Open Hole Completions

The basic configurations for mechanical sand control are shown in

Figure 18. The screen type sand exclusion system is either installed
within the casing or below the bottom of the lowermost casing or
liner. The advantages and disadvantages of the various types of sand
screen are summarised in table 6. The systems are described in detail
in the following sections

• Slotted Pipe

This consists of steel pipe (tubing or casing) where a series of

parallel slots have been cut through the metal (Figure 19). The
width of these slots are normally made as small as mechanically
practical so that they will retain as large a fraction of the
formation sand as possible.
• A Wire Wrapped Screen

• This consists of a triangular shaped wire which is carefully

wound so that there is a constant gap between successive
turns (Figure 20). It is held in place by spot welding the wire
to vertical formers placed at 1cm intervals around the
internal diameter of the screen.

Wire wrapped screens also have a much greater inflow area -

making them more
suitable for higher productivity wells with a greater inflow rate
per unit completion
length. Wire wrapped screens have to be handled carefully at
the rig site - their
strength is much lower than slotted pipe (Figure 20 omitted the
perforated base
pipe which is often used to increase the screen’s strength. This
base pipe has been
included in the cross sectional view in Figure 21).
• Resin Coated Sand Pre-Packed Screen

Pre-packed screens are constructed from two concentric screens

with a layer of
gravel placed in between them (Figure 22). The gravel had been
coated with a layer
of thermosetting resin.

The construction process is as follows:

• The dual concentric screens have been welded onto the base pipe
• The gap between them is filled with the resin coated sand and the final welds completed
• The completed screen is placed in an oven where the thermosetting resin, coating the grain is hardened
creating a strong ring of grave
• Application of Open Hole Completions

Open hole completions have become much more popular since horizontal wells
became widespread. Their use avoids the high cost and technical difficulties in
cementing and perforating long horizontal liners and casings. Some of the problems
- and opportunities - presented to the completion design engineer when designing
horizontal well completions are illustrated in Figures 23 - 26.

Figure 23 shows a “conventional” well design with the

production casing cemented in place just above or just into
producing formation.

Sand control is provided in the completion shown in Figure 24

in which the 7” pre-perforated liner is replaced by a (smaller)
5.5” diameter wire wrapped screen. This change could increase
the well cost by typically 10 - 20%.
Formations consisting of coarse sand grains allow this well cost
to be decreased by substituting a 7” slotted liner for the wire
wrapped screen (Figure 25).

This low cost option gives a typical well cost of only 60% of
that for above wire wrapped screen case. A more complex
Horizontal Well Completion is pictured in Figure 26.

It incorporates (from the top):

• Tubing retrievable Surface Controlled, Sub Surface Safety Valve (SCSSSV).
• 51 / 2 " tubing, reducing to 41 / 2 " tubing in the bottom section where the accessories(gaslift valves etc.) are
installed. The use of 51 / 2 " tubingmaximises the flow capacity while a 51 / 2 " accessory would have too great a
diameter for the casing. The accessories consist of:
• Gas lift valve installed in a side pocket mandrel
• Sliding side door which can be opened to allow fluid circulation between the tubing and the tubing / casing
annulus
• Permanent gauges connected to surface for continuous monitoring of downhole producing conditions
• Wireline nipples where plugs or other devices can be placed
• Polished bore and elastomer seals. This allows tubing expansion or contraction due to the temperature changesto
be taken up. The tubing can also be (partially) retrieved to replace the SCSSSV as required without removing the
packer
• Enhanced Drilling Fluid Requirements for Open Hole
Completion’s

Open hole completion’swith sand exclusion place

specialrequirements on the drilling fluid properties. This is
illustrated in Figure 27a which is a schematic illustration of the
results of large scale experiments in which a mud cake was
deposited in a simulated section of a horizontal well.

An acidisation treatment removed the mud cake covering the

upper part of the hole but left extensive mud cake remnants on
the lower sections. Simulated production from the reservoir into
the well (Figure 27b) resulted in more than half the screen area
being covered by mud cake, reducing fluid flow.
• External Gravel Packs

All the options described above just used only the screen or liner as the basis of the completion. It was inserted into the open
hole and the gap between the screen or liner and the borehole wall remain empty.

The behaviour of the formation will depend on its strength:

o Strong formations: borehole wall remains intact and gap

between the liner and the screen remains empty, providing
the mud cake has been removed.
o Weak formations: borehole collapses and the original
liner/borehole gap becomes filled with failed formation
material.

An alternative is the under reamed, external gravel pack (Figure

28). This involves enlarging (by typically 10 -15 cm) the gap
between the sandface and the screen using a special drill bit an
under reamer.
 • Internal Gravel Pack

The screen or liner is placed inside a cased hole for an internal

gravel pack with gravel being placed in the screen / casing
annulus and in the perforations. A cased hole or internal gravel
pack is illustrated in Figure 18 and enlarged as Figure 29

Special Gravel Packs The combination of an internal gravel

pack and a short, highly conductive, hydraulic fracture
stimulation has become very popular in the Gulf of Mexico
(USA). This is known as “Frac and Pack” (Figure 18).

Advantages / Disadvantages of Gravel Packing These have been

summarised as Table 7 which is self explanatory when read in
conjunction with the remainder of Chapter 5.
 • Gravel Pack Sand Selection

Gravel pack sand is a well rounded, clean (minimum fines and

acid soluble material) that has been sieved so that its size falls
between carefully selected size ranges. If sized correctly, it acts
as a high permeability (i.e. not restricting flow of oil or gas)
filter where the pore throats between the gravel grains are small
enough to restrict the passage of the formation sand grains. This
is illustrated in Figure 30.

The cumulative distribution is then plotted in the

manner shown in Figure 31 using log-linear graph paper.
The size corresponding to a cumulative weight
percentage of 10%, 40% and 90% is known as D10,
D40, and D90 respectively.
The sand grain size distribution is characterised by the
Uniformity coefficient (C):
C = D40 / D90
Formation sands are classified as:
C < 3 well sorted, highly uniform sand
3 < C < 5 uniform sand
5 < C < 10 moderate/poorly sorted sand
C > 10 poorly sorted highly non-uniform sand

Examples of awellsorted (C≈ 2) and poorly sorted sand (C ≈ 8)

are compared in Figure 32.
The gravel pack sand may be selected once the formation sand
has been characterised. There are a number of criteria used - the
most common being the Saucier criteria.

Minimum D50 {Gravel} = 3 * D50 {Formation Sand}

Maximum D50 {Gravel} = 6 * D50 {Formation Sand}
The Saucier criteria makes no allowance for the sand
uniformity. For poorly sorted sand, a second criteria attributed
to Schwartz can be used:
D10 {Gravel} = 6 * D10 {Formation Sand} for C < 5 D40
{Gravel} = 6 * D40 {Formation Sand} for 5 < C <10
D70 {Gravel} = 6 * D70 {Formation Sand} for C < 10

Only a limited range of gravel pack sand sizes are available

commercially (Table 8)

Low porosity (cubic) packing of the gravel is required for both

the Schwartz or Saucier selection criteria to be effective (Figure
33). Rectangular packing of the gravel grains gives a much
higher porosity and allowsinvasion of formation particles in the
range of 42% to 15% of the diameter of the gravel particles.
Engineering judgement needs to be exercised - a typical
scenario that may be encountered is sketched in Figure 34.

Changes in the combined permeability of the gravel / sand

combination once production has commenced are were first
studied by Saucier. He made a dual sand pack from formation
sand and gravel pack sand (Figure 35).

Saucier varied the D50 ratio for the gravel and formation
sand between 2 and 20. Saucier measured the initial
permeability and the final,stabilised permeability after a long
duration flow period. Saucier found that smaller gravel forms
an effective filter for the sand - but has a low permeability
due to its small grain size. Invasion of the gravel by the
formation sand begins to occur once the D50 size ratio is
greater than 7 (Figure 36).

As the gravel increases in size (D50 ratio > 17), the gravel pore
throats become sufficiently large that the formation sand can
pass through with minimal impact on the gravel packs
permeability.
 Operational Considerations

The choice of gravel size influences the points in the operation at

which the permeability of the pack can be damaged e.g. smaller
gravel is more prone to plugging by dirty completion fluids but is
less prone to plugging by fines during production.

The specification for the gravel used for gravel packing operations is laid
down in a "Recommended Practice" by a working committee of the
American Petroleum Institute (API). It must not only be carefully sieved; so
that 98% out of the sample falls between the maximum and minimum
specified sieves; but also the source of the gravel is selected to meet
minimum roundness, sphericity, grain strength criteria along with a
maximum value for acid solubility level and percentage clay.
Synthetic “gravel” is also available at a premium price. The grains are:

• Stronger (less permeability impairing fines produced during pumping due to

grain breakage).
• More spherical (giving a as a natural gravel pack sand higher permeability;
typically 25% greater for the same nominal grain size.
• Lower density than gravel pack sand (less setting when gravel packing
horizontal wells).
• Available in narrow size (sieve) ranges.
 Gravel Packing - Surface Operations

The surface operations occuring during a gravel packing

treatment are summarised in Figure 38. A 1% wt potassium
chloride (KCL) brine base fluid is used “as is” or maybe
viscosified by the addition of a polymer e.g. hydroxyethyl
cellulose. This base fluid is filtered to remove impairing
contaminants and gravel added to the required concentration.
Low concentrations of gravel are added continuously (“on
the fly”) while pumping.

 Fluids for Gravel Packing

The properties of the gravel packing fluid can range from

being similar to water to being highly viscous. In both cases
the fluid performs functions described in Table 9.
  Properties of Viscous Gravel Packing Fluids

The viscosity behaviour of a typical viscous gravel packing

fluid {a dilute (80 lbs polymer / 1,000 gal water) solution of
hydroxy ethyl cellulose polymer in brine} is shown in Figure 39
where the viscosity is plotted as a function of shear rate. Two
types of behaviour are shown:

A low shear rate “Newtonian” region where viscosity

isindependent ofshear rate
m = t /d (2)
where m = coefficient of viscosity,t = shear stress and d = shear
rate
• A higher shear rate region where “power law” behaviour is
shown:
= k = k -1 µ δ δ δ
where η = power index and k = consistency index
Equations (2) and (3) are equivalent for Newtonian fluids which have a power index
of 1. Polymer solutions have a power index less than one. It can be estimated by
plotting the slope of the log viscosity against log shear rate plot (Figure 39). The
typical shear rates encountered in various parts of the well are also indicated in
Figure 39.
 Other Base Brines

1 - 3% wt KClsolution isthe standard brine since it is

compatible with the majority of formations {i.e. creates
minimum permeability damage}. Geopressured formations
require the use of higher density brines - see Table 10
 Fluid Loss Control

Great care is taken to prepare the well in an unimpaired state

prior to the start of the gravel pack operation. Conventional lost
circulation fluids, as employed during drilling, also lead to
formation impairment. Four options are available:

• Placing a small volume of a very high viscosity fluid across

the perforated zone.
• As above with filter cake forming solids (oil soluble resin or
water soluble sodium chloride crystals) which will dissolve
once production commences
• Mechanical solutions such as the LBFV or Large Bore
Flapper Valve (Figure 40).
• A second mechanical solution is the formation Inflow Valve
(FIV) Figure 41 shows.
  The Gravel Pack Operation

Figure 43 schematically illustrates the main stages of a gravel

pack operation for an EGP. The process is the same for an IGP.
A specialised gravel pack tool, called the “cross-over tool”, and
a packer are mounted above the tubing. The “cross-over tool”
allows various circulation paths from the tubing to the annulus
to be selected. The operation is as follows:

• Gravel slurry is pumped down the tubing and “crosses-over” into the liner / casing annulus. The gravel falls to
the bottom of the hole where it builds upwards. The fluid flowsthrough the liner, up thewash pipe and
“crosses-over” so that it can return to the surface via the casing / tubing annulus (Figure 42a).
• The pressure rises rapidly once the gravel level has covered the top of the liner since flow through the gravel
leading to a much higher pressure drop. This is called a screen out (Figure 42b).
• The gravel pack tool is raised to allow circulation directly from the tubing to the tubing / casing annulus (the
flow paths to the gravel pack itself are disconnected). Reverse circulation (DOWN casing/tubing annulus and
UP the tubing) allows the excess gravel slurry to be recovered at the surface. (Figure 42c).
 Gravel Placement with Low Viscosity Fluids

The manner in which the gravel pack is formed depends on the

viscosity of the fluid and the deviation angle that the well is
drilled through the completion interval.

• Gravel placement with low viscosity fluidsis mainly applied to external gravel packs or
shallow formations - The low gravel concentrations (2 lb gravel / gal fluid) and the low
frictional pressure losses minimise the chance of fracturing these weak formations.
• The time required to pump all the gravel and complete the gravel pack is long due to
this low gravel concentration, despite the high pump rate of 5-10 bbl/min.
• This high pump rate can cause permeability impairment due to gravel/sand intermixing
(see section 5.4).
• The large volumes of fluid pumped during the operation through the screen/ liner
increases the opportunity for liner or screen plugging.

Large scale laboratory tests have shown that the gravel pack is formed from the bottom
upwards in vertical or low deviation (< 45º) wells (Figure 43).
The process that occurs in perforations - dune formation - is
more complicated. (Figure 44.) The gravel is deposited at the
mouth of the perforation since it cannot be held in suspension
by the slow moving fluid (leak off rate per perforation is low).

 Gravel Placement with High Viscosity Fluids

Internal Gravel Packs are usually placed with high viscosity

fluids. The high viscosity (up to 300 cp) carrier fluids allowsthe
gravel to be suspended at high gravel concentrations (up to 15
lb gravel/gal carrier fluid or 50 % vol). Also the resulting slurry
can be pumped at low rates (0.5 - 1.5 bbl/min).

The gravel packing process is quite different with high viscosity

fluids:

• Gravel slurry dehydration is initiated at the perforation tip

followed by formation of a gravel node projecting into the
casing once the perforation is filled (Figure 45). The process is
driven by fluid leak off into the formation.
 Gravel Pack Evaluation

A gravel pack evaluation log can be run if the installed volume is

significantly lower than the theoretical volume. Logging tools that can
measure the wellbore formation density through a steel pipe can be
used for gravel pack evaluation. Intervals with an incomplete gravel
pack give a lower shallow density reading than intervals with a good
pack. However, the readings are also influenced by changes in the
completion equipment e.g. connections, packers, transition from wire
wrapped screen to tubing etc. These effects are schematically
illustrated in Figure 47.
 CHEMICAL SAND CONSOLIDATION
Chemical sand consolidation - the artificial strengthening of the oil/gas producing formation - is the least frequently used
of the sand control. This is despite its two major advantages:

• Unlike mechanical forms of sand exclusion, it leaves the

wellbore completely unobstructed without imposing any
restrictions as far as future work-overs are concerned (compared
to a standard perforated completion)

• The consolidation treatment can also be carried out through

tubing i.e. a drilling or work-over rig does is not required and
the tubing etc. Instead a pump truck and a series of chemical
storage tanks with suitable manifolding has to be provided
(Figure 49).

This is illustrated in Figure 48 which shows an enlarged view of

a number of sand grains which have been covered with
chemical cement. Organic resins (epoxy, furan or phenolic) are
the most widely used chemical cements, though other materials
have been used in the past.
The consolidation treatment is operationally complex (Figure 49). This is due to the need to prepare the sand grain surface
so that the chemical cement will adhere to it followed by the need to re-establish the formation permeability e.g. by
overflushing excess chemical cement away from the near wellbore area and displaceing it deeper into the formation. The
complex series of fluids to be pumped could include some, or all, of: acid, neutraliser, preflush, spacer, resin, overflush,
displacement fluid. Each fluid requires a separate tank which have to be manifolded together so they can be pumped in the
correct sequence in one smooth, continuous operation:
 NEW TECHNOLOGY
 "Frac and Pack“

"Frac and Pack" was introduced in section 5.2.4. Field

experience, particularly in the U.S. Gulf Coast, has shown that
this combination of hydraulic fracturing and gravel packing
leads to completions with a lower “skin” and much higher well
productivities (Figure 50). It is thought that the hydraulic
fracture pierces the ring of formation permeability impairment
around the well, providing a high conductivity channel for the
flow of oil or gas (Figure 51).
 New Screen Technology

It was discussed earlier that high flow rates have often been
observed to lead to sand inflow problems (Figure 2). Figure 52
compares the inflow area for a perforated casing with that of
various types of sand control screens and the ideal completion
(an open hole).

Here the sand screens diameter is expanded by 33% to 50% by

pumping, pushing, pulling or rotating an expansion tool through
the screen once it has been placed across the completion
interval (Figure 53).