Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
The paper provides an update on recent advances for, and summarizes global experiences with, dendritic acidizing methods, aka acid tunneling. The scope of the paper includes both Coiled-Tubing (CT) deployed and non-CT methods, and discusses process limitations, candidate selection criteria, job design factors, operational learnings, risks, and surveillance requirements and opportunities. The paper contains a comprehensive review of published information for three different tunneling methods and relevant information for several other tunneling methods. The literature information is supplemented by, depth, temperature, and pressure records for the three processes which are discussed in detail. Execution factors such as logistics required, length of time required, and volumes of acid and other fluids used are also compared for three methods. Previous papers have focused on only one of the methods, whereas the authors will discuss acid job optimization, process risks, and surveillance requirements for multiple acid tunneling methods in substantially greater depth than have past authors. The three methods detailed in the paper are all viable but may have different niches. Differences in the job counts for the different methods are easily explained by differences in process vintages, execution speeds, and depth limitations. Previous optimization efforts were focused on tunnel creation but not acid job effectiveness in terms of the wormholes generated adjacent to the tunnels; however, some progress is now being made in that regard. There are differences in the processes regarding pushing or pulling the jetting nozzles into the tunnels, and differences in resulting tunnel trajectories. Pre-job caliper data are more critical for one of the processes than for the others, and there are significant differences in ability to measure or control tunnel direction. The tunneling tools have different sizes, but when tool size alternatives are available, the larger tool sizes offer no clear advantages to the operator. Useful risk mitigation measures are also discussed in the paper. The paper includes a comprehensive bibliography to facilitate further examinations of the technology alternatives by other petroleum industry professionals.
The paper provides an update on recent advances for, and summarizes global experiences with, dendritic acidizing methods, aka acid tunneling. The scope of the paper includes both Coiled-Tubing (CT) deployed and non-CT methods, and discusses process limitations, candidate selection criteria, job design factors, operational learnings, risks, and surveillance requirements and opportunities. The paper contains a comprehensive review of published information for three different tunneling methods and relevant information for several other tunneling methods. The literature information is supplemented by, depth, temperature, and pressure records for the three processes which are discussed in detail. Execution factors such as logistics required, length of time required, and volumes of acid and other fluids used are also compared for three methods. Previous papers have focused on only one of the methods, whereas the authors will discuss acid job optimization, process risks, and surveillance requirements for multiple acid tunneling methods in substantially greater depth than have past authors. The three methods detailed in the paper are all viable but may have different niches. Differences in the job counts for the different methods are easily explained by differences in process vintages, execution speeds, and depth limitations. Previous optimization efforts were focused on tunnel creation but not acid job effectiveness in terms of the wormholes generated adjacent to the tunnels; however, some progress is now being made in that regard. There are differences in the processes regarding pushing or pulling the jetting nozzles into the tunnels, and differences in resulting tunnel trajectories. Pre-job caliper data are more critical for one of the processes than for the others, and there are significant differences in ability to measure or control tunnel direction. The tunneling tools have different sizes, but when tool size alternatives are available, the larger tool sizes offer no clear advantages to the operator. Useful risk mitigation measures are also discussed in the paper. The paper includes a comprehensive bibliography to facilitate further examinations of the technology alternatives by other petroleum industry professionals.
Summary In this paper, we provide an update on recent advances for and summarize global experiences with dendritic-acidizing (DA) methods, or acid tunneling. We include both coiled-tubing (CT) deployed methods and non-CT methods, and discuss process limitations, candidate-selection criteria, job-design factors, operational learnings, risks, and surveillance requirements and opportunities. A comprehensive review of published information is provided for three different tunneling methods along with relevant information for several other tunneling methods. This literature information is supplemented by depth, temperature, and pressure records for the three processes, which are discussed in detail. Execution factors such as logistics required, length of time required, and volumes of acid and other fluids used are also compared for the three methods. Previous papers have focused on only one of the methods, whereas we will discuss acid-job optimization, process risks, and surveillance requirements for multiple acid-tunneling methods in substantially greater depth than have past authors. The three methods detailed in this paper are all viable but may have different niches. Differences in the job counts for the different methods are easily explained by differences in process vintages, execution speeds, and depth limitations. Previous optimization efforts were focused on tunnel creation but not acid-job effectiveness in terms of the wormholes generated adjacent to the tunnels; however, some progress is now being made in that regard. There are differences in the processes regarding pushing or pulling the jetting nozzles into the tunnels, and differences in resulting tunnel trajectories. Prejob caliper data are more critical for one of the processes than for the others, and there are significant differences in ability to measure or control tunnel direction. The tunneling tools have different sizes, but when tool-size alternatives are available, the larger tool sizes offer no clear advantages to the operator. Useful risk-mitigation measures are also discussed, and a comprehensive bibliography is included to facilitate further examination of the technology alternatives by other petroleum-industry professionals.
Acid jetting is a well stimulation method for carbonate reservoirs, with observed positive production enhancement in some extended-reach horizontal wells. It is a process in which a reactive chemical solution is injected at a high rate at specific entry points via relatively smaller nozzles. The flow out of the nozzles is designed to be a fully turbulent jet which impinges on the porous surface of the rock, leading to a dissolution structure. That dissolution structure is of great interest as it determines the quality of the well stimulation job, which correlates directly to the well productivity. This work is the second step in the overall project about a comprehensive study of acid jetting as a successful stimulation method for carbonate formations. The first step was an experimental study performed using a linear core-flood setup including a jetting nozzle. The objective was to understand the mechanism of acid jetting on carbonate cores and identify the important parameters in the experimental outcome. The current study aims at describing acid jetting from a mathematical standpoint, while using experimental results as model validation and improvement tools. Previously published acid jetting laboratory experiments results revealed the recurring creation of a large dissolution structure at the impingement location in the shape of a cavity and, depending on injection conditions, the propagation of wormholes through the core. A core-scale computational fluid dynamics model has been developed to simulate cavity and wormhole growth in acid jetting. It is a three-dimensional model which alternates between the two fundamental aspects of the overall acid jetting process. Firstly, it models the fluid mechanics of the turbulent jet exiting the nozzle and continuously impinging on the porous media transient surface. The jet fluid dynamics are implemented using a 3D transient finite volume numerical solver using Large Eddy Simulations (LES) with the Smagorinsky-Lilly sub-grid model to solve the Navier-Stokes and continuity equations. The results of this simulation include a velocity and pressure distribution at the porous media surface. Secondly, it models an irreversible chemical reaction with dissolution and transport at the impingement location between the fluid and the rock matrix. The reactive transport is modeled using the conventional kinetics of the dissolution of calcite by hydrochloric acid. This two-step model successfully replicates experimental results and observations for the cavity growth. It can then be coupled with a wormhole growth model to represent the entire experimental acid jetting outcome. The modeling and computational tool for acid jetting developed in this paper will build the understanding for the upscaling and integrated dynamic modeling of an acid jetting stimulation job in the field. It will thus lead to the establishment of a standard for predicting and improving field applications of acid jetting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.