Integrated Wellbore Cleanout Systems:

Improving Efficiency and Reducing Risk

Accumulation of sand and solids in wellbores significantly impairs oil and gas
production. In fact, nearly half of all coiled tubing operations involve well
cleanouts to remove debris. Innovative integration of hardware, software, fluid
cleanout systems and treatment monitoring helps engineers reduce the cost and
risk of wellbore cleanout operations and return wells to production more quickly.

Azhar Ali Movement of sand and accumulation of debris
PETRONAS Carigali Sdn Bhd (PCSB) can have a considerable impact on fluid flow. On
Kerteh, Malaysia the surface, a river can deposit so much silt that
it blocks its own flow, changing its course and
Curtis G. Blount perhaps threatening farmland and communities.
ConocoPhillips
Similarly, downhole in a well, influx of sand can
Anchorage, Alaska, USA
impair or stop the flow of oil from a reservoir.
Stephen Hill Sand fill and debris are not new wellbore
Jai Pokhriyal problems. Generations of oilfield engineers have
Xiaowei Weng faced the challenge of keeping wellbores cleaned
Sugar Land, Texas, USA out. In 1901, the Jennings Oil Company Clement
No. 1 well in southwestern Louisiana, USA,
M. J. Loveland gushed oil at an estimated rate of 7,000 bbl/d
ConocoPhillips [1,113 m3/d].1 Unfortunately for these early oil
Kuparuk, Alaska pioneers, prosperity was short-lived. After seven
hours of production, formation sand plugged
Shahril Mokhtar
more than 1,000 ft [305 m] of casing, stifling oil
Kemaman, Malaysia
production along with dreams of riches and
Jessica Pedota wealth. Attempts to remove the sand from this
Prudhoe Bay, Alaska wellbore eventually failed and the prospect
was abandoned.
Mads Rødsjø Around the same time, oil prospectors in
BP Norge AS Texas began using a novel technique to deal with
Stavanger, Norway oil-production decline—the torpedo.2 A “torpedo
man” carefully lowered substantial quantities of
Radovan Rolovic nitroglycerine down the wellbore. Once the
Stonehouse, England nitroglycerine containers reached their target, a
weight was dropped in the hole, initiating a
Wei Zhou
sequence of events that climaxed in a
Stavanger, Norway
spectacular explosion, and with any luck,
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Marc Allcorn, stimulated the well, removing debris from the
Sugar Land, Texas, USA; and Markus Andre Karlsen, wellbore and reinitiating the flow of oil.
Bergen, Norway.
CoilCADE and PowerCLEAN are marks of Schlumberger.
Today, engineers use safer and more efficient
methods to remove sand and other debris from a
wellbore. In this article, case histories from
North America, the North Sea and Malaysia
demonstrate how carefully designed and
integrated wellbore cleanout processes save
time, reduce cost and risk, and improve
operational efficiency, while also allowing
operators to produce more oil.
Moving Solids up the Wellbore
Wellbore fill is a major concern for operators
throughout the world. This production-inhibiting
problem is commonly dealt with through coiled
tubing (CT) interventions. However, as wellbores
and completions become more complex and as
reserves are produced under increasingly difficult
conditions, there are environments where
conventional coiled tubing cleanout techniques
are not adequate for effective fill removal.
Wellbore cleanouts were among the first
applications for coiled tubing services. Global
estimates suggest that nearly 50% of CT jobs
are performed to remove mobile solids and
debris, such as produced sand or residual
proppant from hydraulic-fracturing treatments.3
Continued developments in CT conveyance
systems generally have allowed operators to keep
pace with increasingly greater well depths, more
tortuous boreholes and more difficult downhole
environmental conditions.4

4 Oilfield Review
 The most common technique for deviated
wellbore cleanout uses a jetting tool conveyed
downhole by CT. While pumping cleanout fluid
down the tubing, the tool is lowered, or washed,
into the sand or other debris, often called fill. At
some distance, or bite, into the fill, downward
motion is stopped. While continuing to circulate
cleanout fluid, the jetting tool is slowly pulled
Summer 2005
uphole some distance in a process known as
sweeping. How large a bite is taken and how far
the tool is pulled uphole is dependent on many
parameters including flow rate, the type of fill,
tubing and casing sizes, the cleanout fluid used,
nozzle design, bottomhole pressure and wellbore
trajectory. Occasionally, the sweep will have to be
brought all the way back to surface before taking
the next bite. Once the fill has been swept
upward to a predetermined depth, the tool is
1. Adapted from an article by Shelia Esthay, Jennings Daily
News, http://www.dnr.state.la.us/cons/first-well.ssi
(accessed March 2, 2005).
2. Olien RM: “The Oil Field Shooters,” http://www.
texancultures.utsa.edu/hiddenhistory/pages1/
OilenOilShooter.htm (accessed March 2, 2005).
3. Rolovic R, Weng X, Hill S, Robinson G, Zemlak K and
Najafov J: “An Integrated System Approach to Wellbore
Cleanouts with Coiled Tubing,” paper SPE 89333,
presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference
and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, USA,
March 23–24, 2004.
4. For more on coiled tubing: Afghoul AC, Amaravadi S,
Boumali A, Calmeto JCN, Lima J, Lovell J, Tinkham S,
Zemlak K and Staal T: “Coiled Tubing: The Next Generation,”
Oilfield Review 16, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 38–57.
5
 A returned to bottom, taking the next bite of fill. The
process is repeated until all fill has been mobilized
and removed from the wellbore (left).
The jetting tool, or wash nozzle, is generally
designed to create fluid turbulence that helps
mobilize and suspend solid particles. However,
for inclined wellbores, turbulence decreases as
distance from the nozzles increases, and solids
often form beds on the lower side of a wellbore as
they fall, or slip, from suspension. As the height
of this solids bed increases, less of the wellbore
cross section is available for flow, so fluid velocity
across the surface of the bed increases until it
reaches a critical mobilization velocity. Once this
velocity is achieved, all or a portion of the fill
B disperses, is remixed with the cleanout fluid and
is transported toward the surface, often forming
a new bed farther up the hole.
As the jetting tool moves upward toward a
newly formed bed, turbulence generated by the
jetting action also helps to mobilize the fill,
transporting it uphole until solids again settle.
The cycle repeats, pushing the bed uphole as the
CT is pulled up the wellbore. If the CT speed is
too fast or the jetting nozzle is inappropriate for
the application, solids will be bypassed and
unevenly distributed along the wellbore,
resulting in only a partial cleanout and the need
for further remedial treatment. This problem
may also occur when flow rates are too low or the
C
carrier fluid is incorrectly designed.

D
< Steps in the cleanout process. A typical well-
bore cleanout process involves several steps.
First, coiled tubing conveys the cleanout tool to
the top of the fill (A). In image B, the tool enters
the fill while circulating, is washing and mobilizing
the solids, and has taken a bite. Then, in image C,
a preplanned bite length has been reached and
the jetting tool is being pulled up toward the liner
top, initiating the sweeping process. In image D,
the fill is being swept through a portion of the
critical angle (40 to 65 degrees) section of hole.
Generally, once solids are swept to the top of the
liner, the nozzle is returned to bottom, the next
bite is taken, and the process repeats until all
solids have been removed from the wellbore.

6 Oilfield Review
Integrating Cleanout Systems
Engineers consider many factors when designing
wellbore cleanouts, including well-completion
geometry, wellbore deviation, cleanout fluid
properties, fluid flow rate, circulating pressure
limits, bottomhole pressure and temperature,
the type of solids that must be removed, and the
length along which solids must be transported.
Most often, higher flow rates, smaller completion
sizes, lighter and more angularly shaped solids,
lower deviations and downhole temperatures,
and shorter distances for solids transport lead to
easier cleanouts. However, at angles between 40
and 65 degrees, the effects of well inclination can
make almost any wellbore difficult to clean.5
Schlumberger began integrating wellbore
cleanout systems in 2002 at the Schlumberger
Integrated Productivity and Conveyance Center
(IPC) in Sugar Land, Texas. Engineers first used
flow-loop data to validate and improve earlier
theoretical models and computer algorithms
(right). Realizing that no single aspect of the
cleanout process determines success or failure,
engineers exploited system synergies and
developed the integrated PowerCLEAN
engineered fill removal system. Software
applications, cleanout fluids, jetting-tool and
nozzle design and solids-removal monitoring
were combined into one system enabling
engineers to design cost-effective cleanout
solutions for sand, bauxite and other debris
under a wide range of wellbore conditions,
including wells with large casing sizes, high
> Large-scale flow-loop simulations. Engineers at IPC used the 7.0-in. transparent flow loop (top)
temperatures and difficult borehole trajectories.
and various coiled tubing sizes to evaluate solids transport for various fluids and wash nozzle
The basic techniques behind modern CT configurations at deviations ranging from 45° to 75° from vertical. Cleanout efficiency was evaluated
wellbore cleanout operations are all similar. True while varying the type of fill, annular velocities and solids loading. Tests also helped optimize nozzle
differentiation exists in the integration of key design for maximum penetration rate, particle suspension and sweeping speeds (bottom).
technical elements such as software, cleanout
fluids, nozzles and solids monitoring.
Software—The PowerCLEAN job-design
software serves as the integrating platform for By adjusting operating procedures, engineers difficult wellbore environments. To address this
wellbore cleanout optimization. For any given set ensure that the solids bed height will not exceed critical need, Schlumberger researchers
of wellbore and operating conditions, the a predetermined portion of the wellbore cross- developed the PowerCLEAN fluid system.
software evaluates and optimizes cleanout fluids sectional area, thereby minimizing friction and Engineers carefully considered the impli-
with respect to a series of variables, including tubing drag, equivalent circulating density cations of thermal effects on viscosity and
the maximum fluid flow rate for a maximum (ECD), and the risk of stuck tubing.6 subsequent hole-cleaning efficiency. Although
allowable circulating pressure; bottomhole Cleanout fluids—Fluids used in wellbore velocity plays a more important role in transport
pressure limitations; maximum CT run-in-hole cleanout operations were often developed for efficiency under dynamic conditions, increasing
(RIH) speed and bite length when penetrating other oilfield operations, such as hydraulic fluid viscosity can forestall static settling.7
the fill; solids bed formation and behavior fracturing and gravel packing. In CT operations, Higher fluid viscosities tend to increase frictional
relative to sweeping requirements; optimal CT cleanout performance demands on fluid systems pressures and reduce flow rates at the expense of
pulling speed for sweeping; and sweep length are high. Hydraulic diameters are often small and
5. Rolovic et al, reference 3.
before taking the next bite of fill. require that engineers balance solids-transport
6. Equivalent circulating density is the effective density
Additional parameters may be set in the efficiency requirements and fluid viscosity exerted by a circulating fluid against the formation that
design software to ensure a safe, efficient and against flow rates, and bottomhole temperatures takes into account the pressure drop in the annulus
above the point being considered.
problem-free cleanout. For example, the and pressures. These and other demands make 7. Rolovic et al, reference 3.
software can predict the height of solids beds many existing cleanout fluids inadequate in
that form on the low side of an inclined wellbore.

Summer 2005 7
 0.5-gal/bbl
Rheology of Various Cleanout Fluids PowerCLEAN gel Solids Transport Length
90 1.75-lbm/bbl welan (20/40 Sand at 30 ft/min Fluid Velocity)
Viscosity at 170 sec-1, cP

80 1.75-lbm/bbl xanthan
70 1.75-lbm/bbl guar
60
50

Fluid
40
30
20
10
0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Fluid Friction Pressure in 1.5-in. OD
Normalized transport length
Straight Coiled Tubing
Temperature, °F
500
0.25-gal/bbl

Pressure drop per 1,000 ft, psl

450
> Evaluating cleanout fluids. Laboratory analysis PowerCLEAN gel
400
350 1.75-lbm/bbl xanthan
shows that the PowerCLEAN fluid exhibits
300 1.75-lbm/bbl guar
thermal stability to just below 325°F (orange
curve - left). Laboratory tests have shown that 250
200
circulating friction pressures of PowerCLEAN 150
gel (orange) are low when compared with those Water
100 1.75-lbm/bbl welan
of common cleanout fluids (middle). In this test, 50
a low-friction solution of water and friction 1.75-lbm/bbl guar
0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 1.75-lbm/bbl xanthan
reducer is shown for comparison purposes (light
Flow rate, bbl/min 0.5-gal/bbl PowerCLEAN gel
blue curve). Also, when compared with xanthan-
1.05-gal/bbl friction reducer
base fluid (pink), the PowerCLEAN fluid (orange)
shows a 100% improvement in carrying capacity
at lower concentrations (right).

Circulating pressure
Corrected depth
Pump rate
Total volume of solids removed
> Monitoring solids removal from the Solids return rate
wellbore. The solids monitoring system PowerCLEAN Real-Time Data Output
uses acoustic signals to monitor the 800 6,000 2.0
amount of solids being removed from 4,000
the wellbore. The measuring device is
noninvasive and attaches to the return 5,000
line from the wellhead (top left and
Total volume solids removed, lbm

1.5
right). A computer interface monitors
Solids return rate, lbm/min

700 3,000
the device throughout the job. Data 4,000
Pump rate, bbl/min

output (right) shows the solids return

Pressure, psi
Depth, ft

rate versus time (red) and an estimate

3,000 1.0
of total solids removed (black). Unusual 2,000
changes in the data alert engineers to 600
potential problems during the job. 2,000
0.5 1,000
1,000
500

0 0 0
13:07:19 15:53:59 18:40:39 21:27:19 00:13:59
Time

8 Oilfield Review
effective hole cleaning. Thermal effects can have
significant deleterious effects on polymer fluids,
reducing viscosity and limiting static suspension
capacity (previous page, top).
Engineers at IPC used horizontal flow loops to
investigate particle-settling velocity under
various flowing conditions. The viscosity profile of Performance of Various Nozzles
a solution containing PowerCLEAN gel exhibited (Water, 60-degree Deviation)

CT pulling out of hole speed, ft/min

50
pronounced shear thinning. Further tests showed
that the fluid system provides acceptable 40
viscosity at temperatures up to 325°F [163°C].
30
In some cases advanced fluid systems are not
needed and ordinary fluids, such as water, guar, 20
hydroxyethylcellulose (HEC), xanthan, welan 10
and viscoelastic surfactant-base fluids, can be
used effectively with the PowerCLEAN system. 0
20 40 60 80 100
An important factor in this process is selection of Annular fluid velocity, ft/min
the correct fluid for a given application,
PowerCLEAN nozzle
complementing velocity requirements, nozzle Forward and backward jets
design and wellbore conditions. Forward jets only
Nozzles—Available designs include nozzles Backward jets only
that jet both forward and backward, those that
jet forward only, those that jet backward only and
those that can be switched on demand from
forward to backward. Any of these combinations
may include radial swirl-inducing features. IPC
engineers designed new nozzles using
theoretical studies and empirical cleanout tests
in 3.5- and 7-in. test loops. The nozzles are
designed to ensure complete and efficient
removal of solids from most wellbore
configurations using fluids ranging from water to
viscosified cleanout fluids.
PowerCLEAN nozzles have no moving parts
and provide continuous jetting to create a
> Washing fill from the wellbore. The PowerCLEAN nozzle (bottom right) outperforms other nozzle
swirling effect. Nozzle focus, direction, size and
designs. In laboratory tests using a 7.5-in. [190.5-mm] flow loop, higher achievable pumping rates and
spacing are specifically designed for wellbore annular velocities coupled with the swirling effects (left) achieved by the nozzle design help keep
cleanouts of unconsolidated fill, optimizing solids in suspension longer, allowing the CT to be pulled at faster rates, saving time and improving
available fluid energy for particle lift and efficiency (top right).
suspension (right). The pressure drop across the
PowerCLEAN nozzle is relatively small, typically
100 to 400 psi [689 to 2,758 kPa] at flow rates
between 1 and 3 bbl/min [159 and 477 L/min].
The small pressure drop across the nozzle allows
for higher flow rates and fluid velocities in the sensor location as a function of time. Observing Wells operated by ConocoPhillips in the
wellbore, which are essential for effective the trend of solids returning to surface during a Kuparuk River Unit on the North Slope of Alaska,
removal of wellbore fill. cleanout job provides a means of verifying the USA, often have wellbore fill that hampers
Solids monitoring—Ensuring that solids are performance of PowerCLEAN systems. Potential production and increases operating cost at some
being removed from the wellbore at predicted problems can be anticipated and corrective point in their life cycle.8 Wellbore trajectories
rates is critical to job success. An important action taken. can be tortuous; in some cases, undulations more
component of the PowerCLEAN system is the
8. Loveland MJ and Pedota J: “Case History: Efficient
solids monitoring device, an acoustic sensor that Cleaning Undulating Trajectories in Alaska Coiled-Tubing Sand Cleanout in a High-Angle Well Using
measures the energy associated with the Integrating wellbore cleanout system components a Complete Integrated Cleaning System,” paper SPE
94179, presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing
collisions of solids on the inside surface of a pipe allows engineers to successfully remove solids Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas,
(previous page, bottom). This energy is processed and debris from wellbores that were previously April 12–13, 2005.
to detect the volume of solids passing by the considered too complex for cleanout or those in
which remedial treatments were not considered
cost-effective.

Summer 2005 9
than 140 ft [43 m] from crest to trough make
sand removal efforts difficult (right).
Early in 2003, drillers completed a well across
a 5,000-ft [1,524-m] horizontal section of the low-
pressure West Sak sand. With the assistance of a
jet pump, the well initially produced up to
660 bbl/d [105 m3/d] of oil.
In September 2003, the well was shut in to
change the artificial lift system. During the
workover, the slickline encountered fill near the
top of the liner at 6,580 ft [2,006 m]. During the
next month, Schlumberger field specialists ran
CT into the wellbore, tagging fill at 8,775 ft
[2,675 m] coiled tubing measured depth (CTMD).
Although slick-water with biopolymer gel pills
and slick-diesel combined with gelled diesel pills
were pumped through the CT to remove wellbore
debris, no significant amount of solids was
brought to surface.9 Later, a review of the
running-weight log indicated that the CT had not
tagged sand, but had reached its sliding-friction
limit, or a condition called helical lockup.
In November 2003, the cleanout attempt was
repeated with larger outside diameter (OD) CT.
The CT field specialist encountered greater than
normal resistance while reentering the well,
which indicated that sand was distributed along
the length of the wellbore. A solid sand plug was
tagged just above the liner top at 6,521 ft
[1,987 m] CTMD. A diesel-base cleanout fluid
was pumped down the tubing at 2.1 bbl/min
[333.8 L/min] while taking 100-ft [30.5-m] bites
into the fill before sweeping to the bottom of the
production tubing, or tubing tail. At 7,449 ft
[2,270 m], returns were lost and the CT was
immediately pulled out of the wellbore.
While pulling the CT to the surface, the field
specialist noted high CT overpull, indicating that
some solids were being left behind along the
wellbore and were sliding down the tubing.
However, as the jetting tool approached surface,
returns were regained and engineers observed a
significant amount of sand, wetted with gelled
diesel, being returned to surface. Following this
cleanout, the well produced for about a month
before sanding off again.
Engineers from ConocoPhillips and
Schlumberger planned a third cleanout, this
time using the PowerCLEAN integrated cleanout
system. The wellbore cleanout design modules
from CoilCADE coiled tubing design and
evaluation software allowed engineers to
evaluate several locally available cleanout fluids,
including 2% potassium chloride [KCl], welan-
base, xanthan-base, diesel, gelled diesel and the
PowerCLEAN gel system. Because of low
bottomhole pressures (BHP), all fluid options
10
0
1,000
True vertical depth, ft
2,000
3,000
8,750 ft 11,250 ft
4,000
4 1⁄2-in. tubing string
5,000
6,000
2,000 0 -2,000 -4,000
Horizontal displacement, ft
Packer/liner hanger/
sealbore assembly
5 1⁄2-in. liner, blank
2,300 ft
140 ft
9 5⁄8-in. casing shoe at 6,767 ft 5 1⁄2-in. liner, perforated
at every other joint
> A difficult wellbore trajectory in Alaska. The highly stratified nature of the multiple-target sands in
one of the West Sak sands of the Kuparuk River Unit, Alaska, led ConocoPhillips to drill Well IC-172
with a twisted and highly undulating borehole (top right). At 6,521 ft measured depth (3,930 feet
[1,198 m] true vertical depth) the well opens up to a 51⁄2-in. preperforated liner that runs to 11,970 ft
[3,648 m]. The undulating nature of the wellbore allows for significant solids-bed buildup and makes
cleaning difficult.
required gas lift, either from natural gas, nozzle. The model also indicated that a single-
nitrogen or both. Due to the undulating geometry sweep operation was possible with a penetration
of this well, the exact concentration of fill rate of 7.2 ft/min [2.2 m/min] and bites of 124 ft
was unknown. [37.8 m]. Each bite would need to be circulated
For fluid volume comparison, engineers for 14 minutes before taking the next.
assumed cleanouts in 500-ft [152-m] increments, During execution, an unexpected increase in
starting at 6,521 ft measured depth. Single-sweep wellhead pressure occurred. Rather than risk
cleanout simulations predicted that use of the losing returns, ConocoPhillips and Schlumberger
PowerCLEAN gel would allow completion of engineers reevaluated the job design and reduced
cleanout operations in 6 hours using 1,000 bbl the flow rate to 3 bbl/min. The remodeled design
[159 m3] of fluid and 220,000 ft3 [6,230 m3] of based on this new flow rate decreased nitrogen
nitrogen. Xanthan gels would require about flow to 800 ft3/min [22.6 m3/min], slowed the
24 hours, 5,200 bbl [826 m3] of fluid and 740,000 ft3 penetration rate to 7 ft/min [2.1 m/min] and
[20,956 m3] of nitrogen, while welan fluids would reduced the bite size to 120 ft [36.6 m]. Reducing
need 29 hours, 5,200 bbl of fluid and as much as the flow rate precluded a single-sweep circulating
920,000 ft3 [26,054 m3] of nitrogen. As for diesel- cleanout, so engineers reverted to a multiple-
base fluids, the high time estimates for a single- sweep process, bringing each sweep to the
sweep cleanout and fluid volume requirements liner top.
precluded further consideration. Throughout the job, the Schlumberger field
Before the production liner was reached, gas engineer monitored the solids-removal rate using
hydrate and multiple sand bridges were cleaned the solids monitoring system, verifying the
from the production tubing.10 The PowerCLEAN efficiency of the cleanout design and solids-
software model recommended a fluid flow rate carrying capacity of the PowerCLEAN system.
of 4.6 bbl/min [731 L/min] with 900 ft3/min Unlike the earlier conventional cleanout systems,
[25.5 m3/min] of nitrogen through the optimized no heavy sand loads were seen while jetting out
the last 1,000 ft to surface. Periodic manual
Oilfield Review
sampling of fluid returns verified the accuracy of
the automated solids monitoring system.
A total of about 3,000 bbl [477 m3] of
PowerCLEAN fluid, 11,120 gal [42 m3] of
nitrogen followed by about 500 bbl [79 m3] of
diesel were pumped. The surface fluid-handling
equipment had limited capacity for nitrogen
removal, so the PowerCLEAN fluid could not be
recirculated and a higher than expected fluid
volume was required. Improvements in degassing
methods are expected to significantly reduce
PowerCLEAN fluid volume requirements on
future jobs. After the cleanout, CT running forces
predicted by CoilCADE modeling closely
matched actual measured values, indicating that
no sand fill remained across the cleaned liner.
Experience gained working with ConocoPhillips
in Alaska helped Schlumberger engineers fine-
tune the PowerCLEAN software modules to more
accurately simulate and plan the entire wellbore
cleanout process. Initial post-job production
UNITED KINGDOM
> Proppant removal in the North Sea. In the Valhall field, centered approximately between Norway, Denmark, Germany and the UK
in the North Sea (bottom right), engineers at BP spend about a third of their time (top) dealing with post-stimulation wellbore cleanup.
Summer 2005
rates from this well were around 1,000 bbl/d,
later stabilizing at 500 bbl/d [79 m3/d] of oil. The
integrated cleanout system was successful in a
well with low BHP, large internal-diameter
completion and a long, undulating, horizontal
wellbore. ConocoPhillips and Schlumberger plan
to continue using the system to help improve
cleanout efficiency on other difficult wells in the
Kuparuk River Unit.
Improving Post-Stimulation Cleanout Efficiency
As operators develop more low-permeability
reservoirs, hydraulic-fracturing stimulation of
highly deviated or otherwise complex horizontal
wellbores has become a relatively standard
practice. After fracturing, however, varying
amounts of proppant are left behind and must be
removed before production begins (see “New
Fibers for Hydraulic Fracturing,” page 34).
Since 1996, hydraulic fracturing in the Valhall
field, offshore Norway, has become the preferred
Wait on rig
and other delays
Weather 8%
delays
16%
Nonproductive
time
6%
Proppant cleanout
NORWAY
Stavanger
Valhall field
Hod field DENMARK
GERMANY
method of stimulation by operator BP, formerly
Amoco. In the North Sea, the cost of CT
operations is high and often requires a
stimulation vessel and a team of more than 20
completions and operations specialists. With
proppant-cleanout operations accounting for
about 35% of CT utilization time in the Valhall
field, improving the efficiency of cleanout
operations would not only reduce cost, but would
also bring wells on line faster, generating
incremental production revenue (below).11
9. Slick-water refers to a water-base fluid with additives
designed to reduce friction pressure. Slick-diesel refers
to an oil-base fluid with friction-reducing additives.
10. A gas hydrate is a solid crystalline structure consisting of
water with gas molecules in an ice-like cage configura-
tion. Water molecules form a lattice structure into which
many types of gas molecules can fit. Most gases, except
hydrogen and helium, can form hydrates.
11. Zhou W, Amaravadi S and Roedsjoe M: “Valhall Field
Coiled Tubing Post-Frac Proppant Cleanout Process
Optimization,” paper SPE 94131, presented at the
SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference and Exhibition,
The Woodlands, Texas, April 12–13, 2005.
Final Start
rigdown rigup
Liner
3% 8% operations
9%
Hydraulic
fracturing
15%
35%
11
 During 2004, engineers at BP and
Schlumberger built a database and documented
the CT cleanout processes used during 29 runs in
four completions. Each step in the cleanout
process was benchmarked with 24 parameters
including proppant properties, start depth,
penetration speed and rates, sweep-range
depths, circulation rate, time at bottom, pulling
out of hole (POOH) rate and time consumed on
each step. Of these parameters, engineers
focused on optimizing total effective time (TET),
defined as the sum of penetrating time, time
circulating bottoms-up and time washing from
bottom to surface.
Using PowerCLEAN software modules,
engineers analyzed previous cleanout operations
and defined opportunities for improving
efficiency. Of particular note was the finding that
residual fracturing proppant appeared in the
wellbore in varying distribution patterns,
requiring that each of the design elements had to
be optimized for each specific wellbore section.
As a part of the optimization process,
engineers verified that a simple seawater
cleanout fluid, already in use, provided sufficient
carrying capacity for single-run cleanouts.
Further analysis, modeling and simulations using
the PowerCLEAN software modules led to
recommendations for maximum CT speed when
penetrating fill or beginning the process of fill
removal. Specific parameters, such as whether
solids formed a bed on the low side of a wellbore
and the most efficient bite length into or out of
the fill, helped determine nozzle selection, flow
rates and fluid rheology requirements.
The new design and recommendations helped
engineers optimize circulation rate and select
proper nozzles for each application. They also
were able to determine cleanout-fluid rheology
requirements, calculate running speeds and bite
increments, and minimize or eliminate time on
bottom circulating bottoms-up. Speeds as fast as
20 m/min [66 ft/min] in the liner and tubing
sections were obtained while sweeping out
of the hole.
For BP, the Valhall proppant-cleanout
optimization project achieved project goals by
improving operational efficiency and reliability,
and by reducing stuck-pipe risk. A total of 22 runs
across three completions used the PowerCLEAN
integrated cleanout system. The average TET
was reduced from 17.6 h/run to a new average
of 11.1 h/run (below). A savings of 6.5 h/run
represents a 37.2% reduction in average effective
cleanout time and indicates a significant
improvement in performance efficiency.
Improving Cleanout Efficiency in
Mature Fields
Located about 170 km [105.6 miles] northeast of
Kemaman, Terengganu, offshore Malaysia in the
South China Sea, the Dulang field began
production in the early 1980s. Operated by
PETRONAS, the field comprises four platforms,
each with 15 to 22 wells. As in many maturing oil
fields, maintaining production rate in the Dulang
field is a daunting task.
Although oil and gas wells in the Dulang field
experience wax deposition, scaling and high
water cut, sand production remains the primary
cause of production decline. In 2004, at least
eight wells were shut in because of sand fill,
while production slowly declined in many others.
Wells in the Dulang field often require
intervention due to sand production every three
to six months. For PETRONAS, the speed and
efficiency of borehole cleanout operations
directly affect field production, revenue and
return on investment.
Large casing sizes, highly deviated wellbores,
elevated borehole temperature, low reservoir
pressure and limited production-platform deck
space all challenged the efficiency of wellbore
cleanout operations. Early in 2004, PETRONAS
and Schlumberger engineers evaluated eight

Valhall Proppant Cleanout Times

35

30
Effective cleanout time, h

25

20
Average = 17.6 h/run
Average = 11.1 h/run
15

10

0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55
Runs

1 2 3 4 A B C
Completions

> Improvement in cleanout efficiency. Evaluation of CT cleanout runs in four completions (1, 2, 3 and 4)
in the Valhall field (blue) indicated the average run time to be 17.6 hours. After applying the PowerCLEAN
integrated system, engineers reduced the average time over three completions (A, B and C) to 11.1 hours
per run (green), saving BP significant time and cost, while getting wells back into production faster.

12 Oilfield Review
 C-18L Trajectory

Number Well Treatment Depth at Deviation, Number Tubing, in. Casing, in. 1,000

True vertical depth, ft

top of fill, ft deg of runs
1 B-22L Sand cleanout 2,986 71 1 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8
2,000
2 B-11L Sand cleanout 6,108 60 1 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8
3 B-16 Wax cleanout N/A 80 1 2 7⁄8 3,000
4 C-22L Sand cleanout 3,035 75 2 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8
5 C-9L Sand cleanout 4,954 50 1 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8 4,000
6 C-17S Sand cleanout 7,888 70 1 3 1⁄2
-2,00 0
7 C-18L Sand cleanout 6,677 63 1 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8 0 0
0
Nort 2,00 ft
8 D09L Sand cleanout 6,309 50 1 2 7⁄8 9 5⁄8 h, ft 2,000 4,000 East
,

> Improving cleanout efficiency in a mature field. In the South China Sea, PETRONAS has been operating the Dulang field for more than 25 years. The
average wellbore deviation is 65 degrees, making cleanout operations difficult. Eight wells with trajectories similar to Well C-18L (right) were evaluated
as candidates for efficiency improvement using the PowerCLEAN integrated system (left).

wells for sand and wax cleanout utilizing the
PowerCLEAN integrated systems approach
(above). Using the CoilCADE wellbore cleanout
module, engineers developed unique treatment
solutions for each of the eight wells. Cleanout
fluids varied from gel and water to a combination
of nitrified seawater and wax solvent, and were
designed for specific borehole conditions and
well configurations.
To restore and potentially enhance oil
production, engineers needed to clear the
wellbores of sand and debris, thus allowing
conveyance of slickline reservoir evaluation
tools. Then, each well could be evaluated,
stimulated if necessary and brought back on line
in a minimal amount of time.
Most wells in the field are similar, with
borehole deviations of approximately 63 degrees
and bottomhole temperatures (BHT) of 180 to
250°F [82 to 121°C]. Depending on design
requirements, engineers optimized fluid cost on
several wells by selecting two different cleanout
fluid systems, an HEC-base fluid for tubing
cleanout and the PowerCLEAN fluid system to
remove sand from the larger, and more difficult
to clean, tubing-to-casing annular space.
With the exception of Well C-22L, all cleanout
jobs were performed in one pass. Each treatment
was evaluated by slickline to confirm the
effectiveness of sand removal. On several wells,
engineers modified the design by switching to
nitrified foam fluids to compensate for lost
circulation and leaking completion tubing.
The integrated job design improved efficiency fluids, while mechanical engineers and fluid-
and reduced time in hole by optimizing pump mechanics specialists develop nozzle technology;
rates, defining sand-bite sequences, properly the PowerCLEAN integrated wellbore cleanout
selecting nozzles for sand mobilization and system exemplifies this type of multidisci-
suspension, and accurately estimating chemical plinary collaboration.
consumption. Production was restored in seven Engineers have the tools and computing
of the eight wells immediately following support to quickly model, perform multiple itera-
treatment, while the other came back on line tions and optimize cleanout system performance
following acid stimulation. for most wellbore conditions and requirements.
On average, the PowerCLEAN integrated The successful integration of cleanout processes
systems approach to borehole cleanout reduced is helping many operators keep oil flowing
time in hole by 75%. The average job time was from their fields. This basic understanding of
reduced from two days to around one half-day per interdependent processes will lead the way
treatment. The operator saved time, improved to many more efficiency improvements in
return on investment, and returned the wells exploration and production systems. —DW
to production at a much faster rate, realizing
as much as 900 bbl [143 m3] of incremental oil
per day.
Process Efficiency
Efficiency is essential in optimizing production
from aging oil fields and reservoirs that are
difficult to produce. By understanding the
interrelationships and potential synergies in
process elements, new technologies emerge,
helping operators return wells to production
faster. As nonproductive time decreases, costs
decrease and field output increases.
Understanding key process elements is not
always straightforward, and often requires the
insights of experts from diverse disciplines. For
example, chemists generally develop cleanout

Summer 2005 13