Wellbore Integrity, Sand Management, and Frac Pack

Screening Methodology for

Downhole Sand-Control Selection
The sand-management strategy for existing Northwest Shelf (NWS) fields offshore Australia involves reactive downhole sand control in the event sand is
produced above acceptable limits. Sandface completions for new wells consider
well and system risks during the life of
the development. A screening method
was developed to evaluate and rank
available sand-control techniques for
NWS conditions. Published criteria were
used in a systematic manner, allowing a
consistent, balanced, and transparent
view of benefits and risks across the different system aspects.
Introduction
The NWS gas/condensate fields (North
Rankin, Goodwyn, Perseus, and EchoYodel) are approximately 135 km offshore
from Dampier, Australia. Typically, these
fields were developed without downhole
sand control or specific topside sand-handling equipment. Considerable benefits have
been realized in terms of development costs
and production capacity as a result, with
minimal sand production observed to date.
However, there is uncertainty about future
sand production as reservoirs deplete or
water breakthrough occurs.
Woodside formed an integrated sand
team with the specific aim to protect
against the possible effects of sand. The
team developed a sand-management strategy as follows.
Manage current (low) levels of sanding by well management (including best
practices for sand monitoring, drawdown,
and bean up) and assess topside desanding options.
Develop a downhole plan for key
existing wells. Activate this plan on a reactive basis if sand production becomes a
problem.

Build system robustness against the risk

of sand by considering the installation of
downhole sand control in new wells.
To support this strategy, a systematic
approach to ranking available sand-control
options (for both remedial and new-field
developments) was developed and applied.
Sand-Control Selection
The method uses a combination of a flow
chart and sand-control matrix. The initial
flow chart is used to categorize whether the
well is an existing well (remedial/retrofit
solution) and whether it is subsea or platform as well as to address deviation across
the reservoir section.
The sand-control-selection matrix uses a
traffic-light-based system to represent results as follows.
Green = no concerns.
Yellow = some concern.
Orange = significant concern.
Red = ruled out.
The system assigns the color code
according to a likelihood-vs.-consequence
ranking. Anything that receives a red ranking in any category is eliminated immediately, while the remaining options are graded according to overall comparison across
all categories.
In some cases, rankings may be
assigned using well-defined objective criteria [e.g., particle-size-distribution (PSD)
criteria for screens and reliability data],
while in other categories, the rankings can
be more subjective or context-specific. It
was recognized that similar wells under
different circumstances could have a different risk ranking for valid reasons (e.g.,
introducing a new sand-control technique
vs. using an established technique for an
area)the matrix enables this difference
to be shown in a balanced and transparent manner.

This article, written by Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper
SPE 88493, Screening Methodology for Downhole Sand-Control Selection, by
Chris Farrow, SPE, Helix RDS, and David Munro and Thomas McCarthy, Woodside
Energy Ltd., prepared for the 2004 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and
Exhibition, Perth, Australia, 1820 October.

SEPTEMBER 2005

Sand-Failure Characteristics. The likelihood of sand failure and the mode of failure
(i.e., transient or catastrophic) along with
the uncertainty in the prediction and
degree of failure over the reservoir section
are addressed in this method. The sand-failure criteria are used to assess whether surface sand-management techniques are
applicable (or if downhole sand control is
required), whether there is potential for
passive sand control (such as near-wellbore
drawdown control or selective perforating),
or if sand-control installation can be
deferred, leading to possible increases in
production as well as saving completion
costs. It is recognized that significant
uncertainty exists in the prediction of sanding, particularly with respect to the volume
and concentration of sand produced.
PSD. Mechanical-sieve measurements are
used to select between standalone screen,
expandable sand screen, or gravel-packing
applications. Applicability depends on such
factors as median particle size, uniformity
and sorting coefficients, and fines content.
Expandable sand screens are evaluated separately from conventional standalone
screens, with their application to nonuniform formation PSDs or high fines environment being dependent on full compliance
with the borehole wall.
Well Condition and Shales. For a new
well, the key critieria addressed are the
presence and extent of shales within the
reservoir section, borehole-stability issues
(e.g., degree of consolidation and chemical-compatibility/reactive-shale problems),
whether washouts are likely to occur and
how severe they might be, the hole size,
and the planned drill-in fluid and filtercake design. While it is difficult to be
definitive with regard to quantifiable
design limits for these criteria, they are
used to rank the relative risks associated
with installing expandable sand screens
and cased or openhole gravel packing, particularly the requirement for alternativepath designs and frac-pack techniques.
Detailed fluid, screen, and shale testing
and/or gravel-pack simulation modeling

67

are required for a definitive decision.

However, the general guidelines used can
allow a first-pass estimate to be made [e.g.,
justification of the use of alternative-path
technology in the event an annular bridge
is expected (shale swelling, sloughing, or
hole collapse)].
For existing wells, the perforated-interval length, perforation condition (particularly with cavities), and degree of reservoir
damage are reviewed for cased-hole conditions. For openhole existing wells, the current wellbore configuration (i.e., presence
of existing sand control) and its status are
taken into account.
Reservoir Characteristics. The initial and
final reservoir pressures are evaluated with
respect to materials selection and gravelpack design. The abandonment reservoir
pressure is of concern regarding compaction and potential collapse of expandable sand screens and is related to potential
reduction in well productivity with respect
to collapse of formation sand around standalone screens. For reservoirs with high
compaction, a frac-pack completion may
represent the best choice.
Fracture gradient will affect required
pumping pressures for frac-pack completions and is an important design consideration for openhole gravel-pack design.
Specific issues are treatment pressures, displacement techniques, fluid selection, and
the requirement for alternative-path technology in the event of no (or limited)
returns caused by loss of filter cake or
by fracturing.
Reservoir temperature and fluid properties should be taken into account for sandcontrol materials and fluid selection.
Reservoir permeability and vertical-/horizontal-permeability ratio will influence
the selection and design of sand-control
techniques and should be evaluated critically when cased-hole applications
are considered.
The length of the completion interval and
the ratio of net- to gross-pay thickness along
the section are two of the most important
criteria for sand-control selection. For example, chemical consolidation techniques typically are limited to intervals of approximately 5 to 10 m and, hence, normally are not
applied where there is a significant gross
reservoir thickness. A completion-length
cutoff also is applied for a single frac-pack
operation that depends on well deviation
and reservoir-sand description.
The number and distribution of reservoir
intervals to be completed also will affect the
technique selected and may require multi-

68

ple treatments. This requirement can

exclude certain techniques; for example, a
frac-pack operation may be discounted in
favor of a high-rate water pack for a highpermeability formation. Proximity to fluid
contacts also may preclude the use of fracpack techniques when it is not possible to
ensure control of fracture growth or when
there is a lack of fracture containment.
The available data set was limited in
terms of the number of wells and hampered
by a lack of a consistent, systematic, and
accurate buildup analyses on high-rate gas
wells. However, additional testing in this
area includes data to ensure reliable interpretation of the various skin effects (e.g.,
completion, perforations, geometry, and
sand control).
Production Performance. The required
production rates (i.e., well productivity,
near-wellbore drawdown, and downhole
velocities) will significantly affect the sandcontrol option selected. The reduced inside
diameter of the completion, which is associated with gravel-packing techniques, may
result in unacceptable frictional-pressure
drops for high-rate gas developments.
Modeling inflow performance, including
frictional pressure drop, is critical in determining the appropriate sand-control technique. Downhole velocity across the sandface will affect the choice of standalone or
expandable screens or cased-hole gravelpack techniques. Water breakthrough has
been linked to sand production, and, therefore, water-production rates and timing are
considered with respect to the potential for
delayed sand production.
When ranking the available sand-control
techniques on the basis of productivity, it is
important to recognize that there is a limited
reliable data set available for NWS conditions. Published sand-control skin data are
predominantly the total skin for oilwell completions (i.e., total skin is often evaluated at
a single pressure-transient rate, and, therefore, the non-Darcy skin component is indivisible). For high-rate gas fields, it frequently is the non-Darcy skin that controls the
inflow performance of the wells. Therefore, a
database of mechanical and non-Darcy skin
factors for various sand-control techniques
was constructed and used to evaluate well
performance for different sand-control completions. While it is recognized that any
comparison of the skin data from different
wells and fields is somewhat arbitrary, it is
believed that the data represent a significant
improvement over theoretical modeling
techniques alone, particularly in the area of
non-Darcy skin factors.

Intervention and Reservoir-Management

Requirements. Key considerations include
the requirement for zonal isolation or shutoff of discrete intervals, whether production is commingled or selective, and
whether access is required for stimulation
or logging. The need for frequent well
interventions and/or shut-in and chokesize changes also is considered and may
preclude the use of passive sand-control
techniques such as drawdown control or
selective perforating.
Reliability. The various sand-control
options are ranked in terms of reliability. A
comprehensive database compiled by BP
through inter- and intracompany networking includes more than 300 gas-well completions. This relatively large population of
wells gives some confidence that general
conclusions from the database are accurate,
although reliability data for more-recent
sand-control techniques are limited in the
context of potential 30-year well lives on
the NWS.
Cost and Installation Risks. These criteria
are evaluated on an individual-project basis
by a multidiscplinary team of well engineers
and sand-control/completion engineers.
Application
Application of this sand-control screening
for several key development wells/projects
was still in the conceptual planning phase
at the time this paper was written.
Conclusions
Selecting the optimum sand-control strategy for a well can make significant differences in terms of life-cycle risks and well
productivity. A screening method was
developed to evaluate and rank sand-control techniques in a comprehensive and
systematic fashion for NWS high-rate
gas conditions.
The methodology, incorporating a combination of a flow chart and a sand-controlselection matrix, enables a structured discussion, particularly regarding the key
design parameters and the assessment of
risks. The developed approach ensures that
best practices are used with a transparent
JPT
quality assurance.

For a limited time, the full-length paper is

available free to SPE members at
www.spe.org/jpt. The paper has not been
peer reviewed.

SEPTEMBER 2005