Well Testing and Evaluation of Tubing-Conveyed Extreme Overbalanced Perforating

Azari, Mehdi; Burleson, John; Soliman, Mohamed Y.; Mason, Justin; Gazi, Naz H.

doi:10.2118/37326-ms

Cited by 12 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an underbalanced condition with normal perforating techniques, the fracture will propagate in the direction perpendicular to the least principal stress, which in most cases is not the same direction as the perforation orientation. 2,3,4 This case history is one in which this technique was successfully applied. (Fig.…”

Section: Background Of the Perforation/stimulation Methods Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Trip Perforation/Stimulation and Testing Method Removes Formation Damage, Reduces Operational Costs, and Increases Estimated Production in the Mato Rico Field in Parana Basin, Brazil

Etcheverry¹,

Carneiro²,

Leite³

2000

Proceedings of SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractStimulation combined with perforating during a drill stem testing (DST) operation offers a unique operational technique that shows promise of resolving many inherent formation damage problems that can occur when perforation is conducted during completion activities. This paper will discuss a case history in which a unique perforationstimulation operation was attempted for the first time in Brazil. The method was suggested to a major operator who wished to test a damaged formation of an exploratory gas well in the Mato Rico Field in Parana Basin, Brazil. The primary requirement of the operation was to obtain the main reservoir parameters (pressure, permeability, skin and extension) of a sand formation in which an earlier openhole drill stem test had already identified severe near-wellbore damage. Since the procedure would not involve the main target of the well, extreme cost efficiency was required.With the method suggested, a well with an acid fluid column is pressurized with nitrogen to above fracturing pressure of the formation before the gun is fired. Gas is then injected with acid to create short fractures extending from the perforation tunnels. The presence of gas lowers the amount of liquid contact with the formation plus the additives in the acid reduced surface tension. This action facilitates the well's coming into production after perforation and results in a reduction of formation damage.The perforating/stimulation method creates highly conductive short fractures that outweigh any restriction that might be caused by the perforating debris. The extreme energy at the moment of perforating along with the rapid expansion of the high-pressure nitrogen gas create high erosion velocities that remove perforation debris from around the wellbore and extend the perforations several feet into the formation. Following the initial perforation, additional pumping of nitrogen extends the created fractures even further into the formation. The debris and the crushed zone that exists when the guns detonate will be pushed away from the wellbore during the pumping stage. This will greatly diminish any adverse effects that overbalanced perforating may cause in productivity.After careful review of alternative methods, this procedure was chosen. It provided excellent testing results and was successful in removing most of the previously identified skin damage. This was verified by the subsequent testing, which showed that the skin damage had been reduced to 14 from its original 89. This reduction allowed the same quantity of gas to be produced at a lower drawdown.The positive effects from using the combined technologies include: 1. Savings in rig time. 2. Time and cost of additional stimulation jobs to flow the well had traditional procedures been used. 3. Better understanding of the formation response to stimulation treatments and fluids. 4. A significant increase in the gas production from an originally estimated 10,000 m 3 /D to 380,000 m 3 /D.

show abstract

Section: Background Of the Perforation/stimulation Methods Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Trip Perforation/Stimulation and Testing Method Removes Formation Damage, Reduces Operational Costs, and Increases Estimated Production in the Mato Rico Field in Parana Basin, Brazil

Etcheverry¹,

Carneiro²,

Leite³

2000

Proceedings of SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Novel Approach in Completing Unconventional Tight-Gas Condensate Wells Using Propellant Gas-Assist Perforating and Foam Matrix Acidizing: Case Study

Trehan

Jones

Kline

2012

SPE Western Regional Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After successful production from a few wells in a California field, two development/appraisal wells were drilled targeting the southwest flank of the structure. Based on experience with the offsets, it was expected that this sandstone formation would be fracture stimulated to mitigate formation damage. Most of the wells in California have intervals ranging from 1,500 gross ft to ~600 net ft. Fracture stimulation or matrix acidizing are common stimulation techniques used on these types of wells. Fracture stimulation was attempted because of very low permeability but was not successful. On the first well, several attempts were made to establish fracture initiation in different intervals; however, on each attempt, the fracturing pressure encountered was too high to safely continue the job. A fracture gradient of more than 1.1 psi/ft was estimated. After 20 days of unsuccessful attempts, the operator ceased fracture stimulation of the well, which was nearing the point of abandonment because producing oil or gas did not seem economically viable at this point. After carefully studying the matrix rock, a gas-assisted perforating process followed by foamed matrix acidizing was recommended as an economical solution to produce the wells. This gas-assisted perforating process uses an extreme overbalanced (EOB) condition by using energized gas to simultaneously perforate and stimulate a well in a single intervention. During an EOB perforating application, wellbore pressures will exceed the fracture gradient for several seconds to minutes while injecting wellbore and tubing fluids at high rates. This paper presents a case study of two unconventional tight-gas condensate wells where using a gas-assisted perforating process followed by foamed acidizing provided successful stimulation. The design considerations, stimulation technique, and job details are discussed.

show abstract

Well-Testing Challenges in Unconventional and Tight Gas Reservoirs

Azari

Hamza

Hadibeik

et al. 2018

SPE Western Regional Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, newly drilled wells are tested using a drillstem test (DST) or wireline formation test (WFT) to evaluate production potential and help make development and completion decisions. These methods are typically designed to flow the well under controlled conditions and then shut in the flow to achieve a pressure buildup (PBU). Depending on how it is conducted, testing could involve a typical DST, closedchamber DST, slug test, or surge test. Later, during the life of a well, other tests, such as standard drawdown-buildup, reservoir limit, flow-after-flow, interference, and pulse tests are conducted to evaluate productivity, remaining reserves, amount of damage, depletion, and production allocation. Even though injection/falloff (IFO) is also an established testing type, it is not conducted as often as a standard pressure drawdown (PDD) and PBU test within the petroleum industry because of possible formation damage resulting from a noncompatible injection fluid. Such tests are usually conducted to determine injection efficiency for water injection wells, communication between an injection and a production well during a secondary oil recovery project, such as waterflooding, in mini- or microfracturing to determine formation and rock mechanics properties, and in nonproducing wells where a standard PDD and PBU test would not work. Because of controlled rates with an IFO test in low-permeability wells, faster flow stabilization can be achieved, resulting in shorter wellbore-storage durations. This technique can obtain well and reservoir information faster than a conventional PBU test. One issue with unconventional wells, particularly tight gas wells, is that the wellbore storage lasts significantly longer than in standard wells. A downhole shut-in tool or any test that minimizes the wellbore storage effects can greatly reduce the duration of such tests and help improve the quality of the analysis results. An extended diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT) conducted with a downhole wireline operation that minimizes high wellbore storage issues is also discussed. This paper discusses several well-testing applications with corresponding analyses pertaining to unconventional wells. The results provided valuable information to help optimize production and evaluate reservoir potential.

show abstract

Well Testing and Evaluation of Tubing-Conveyed Extreme Overbalanced Perforating

Cited by 12 publications

References 22 publications

Single-Trip Perforation/Stimulation and Testing Method Removes Formation Damage, Reduces Operational Costs, and Increases Estimated Production in the Mato Rico Field in Parana Basin, Brazil

Single-Trip Perforation/Stimulation and Testing Method Removes Formation Damage, Reduces Operational Costs, and Increases Estimated Production in the Mato Rico Field in Parana Basin, Brazil

A Novel Approach in Completing Unconventional Tight-Gas Condensate Wells Using Propellant Gas-Assist Perforating and Foam Matrix Acidizing: Case Study

Well-Testing Challenges in Unconventional and Tight Gas Reservoirs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About