Injection.
Water Salinity,
Summary. Injection-water/forma-
tion-clay compatibility criteria that are
based on water and formation-clay
analyses were developed to deter-
mine whether an injection water has
sufficient total cations and/or divalent
cations to prevent formation-clay dis-
persion and permeability impairment
and to determine when formation
pretreatment is required to prevent
impairment during the transition to in-
jection water. These criteria also were
incorporated into a scheme to deter-
mine the type of brine to be used for
completion, stimulation, and work-
over operations to prevent formation-
clay deflocculation or to eliminate for-
mation pretreatment.
. tions describe how water salinities and com-
836
Formation Pretreatment,
and Well·Operations
Fluid·Selection Guidelines
Ronald F. Scheuerman and Barbara M. Bergersen, SPE,
Shell Development Co.
Introduction
Two factors affect whether injected waters/
brines will cause formation-clay-related im-
pairment: the water must have an adequate
total cation concentration (TCC) to prevent
deflocculation of formation clays, and dur-
ing the transition from one water/brine to
another, cation exchange must not reduce
the divalent cation concentration below the
level required to keep clays flocculated.
This paper discusses (1) the salinity-re-
lated formation damage mechanism, (2) in-
jection-water evaluation, (3) formation
pretreatments to prevent clay deflocculation
during water/water transitions, and (4) well-
operations brine-selection guidelines to pre-
vent clay deflocculation and to eliminate the
need for formation pretreatment. Field ap-
plication guidelines and field test results are
presented.
Salinity·Related Formation
Damage Mechanism
Formation clays respond to inadequate-salin-
ity waters by swelling and/or deflocculating
(dispersing). Both mechanisms cause clay
particles to detach from each other and from
pore walls. Migration of, and pore-throat
plugging by, deflocculated clays is the
dominant impairment mechanism related to
salinity-sensitive clay. The following sec-
positions, especially divalent cation concen-
trations, influence clay deflocculation.
Flocculation Salinity. Clays have a net
negative charge because of substitution of
lower-valence cations in the clay lattice
structure-e.g., Al +3 for Si +4 and Mg +2
for Al +3. To maintain electrical neutrali-
ty, the resulting negative lattice charge is
balanced by positive cations (counter-ions)
located on and near the clay surface. The
spatial distribution of counter-ions is deter-
mined by the opposing forces of electrostatic
attraction to the negative clay lattice and
diffusion into the surrounding bulk solution.
This diffused concentration of cations
around the clay particle is often referred to
as the counter-ion cloud or diffuse double
Copyright 1990 SOCiety of Petroleum Engineers
layer. In dilute brines, diffusion forces are
large and the counter-ion cloud expands.
When mutual repulsion between the charged
counter-ion clouds exceeds van der Waals
attractive forces, the particles disperse. In-
creasing salinity causes the counter-ion
cloud to contract. Flocculation salinity (as
defined here) is the cation concentration at
which the counter-ion cloud contracts suffi-
ciently that short-range van der Waals at-
tractive forces begin to cause clay particles
to attach to each other and to pore walls
(flocculate) or just begin to deflocculate (dis-
perse) as brine salinity is slowly decreased.
(Although flocculation and dispersion prob-
ably occur at slightly different concentra-
tions, our tests were not sufficiently sensitive
to make such a distinction.)
Effect of Clay Type. Flocculation salini-
ty increases with increasing clay cation ex-
change capacity (CEC). For example, the
NaCI flocculation salinities for Wyoming
montmorillonite (CEC=76 meq/lOO g dry
clay), IMt-l illite (CEC = 15 meq/lOO g),
and KGa-2 kaolinite (CEC=3 meq/lOO g)
are 600, 200, and 17 meq/L, respectively.
Chlorite has essentially no CEC and is not
deflocculated by fresh water. The compo-
sition and flocculation properties of the clays
and cores tested in this study are summar-
ized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
Effect of Cation Type. The clay-floccu-
lating power of cations is a function primar-
ily of valence and secondarily of the specific
cation. Within a given valence, flocculating
power decreases with increasing hydrated
ionic radii. Thus, flocculating power de-
creases in the order Cs + > Rb + > NH/ ,
K + > Na + > Li + for monovalent cations
and Ba++ >Sr++ >Ca++ >Mg++ for
divalent cations. 1,2 As discussed later in
Well-Operations Brine Selection, K + is
about six times more effective in flocculat-
ing clays than is Na + . NH/ has the same
hydrated ionic radius as K + , and H + is
smaller than K + . Thus, these ions are con-
sidered to have clay-flocculating properties
equivalent to K + .
Depending on clay type, divalent cations
are 50 to 100 times more effective in floc-
culating clays than monovalent cations, 1
and increasing Ca + + ion concentration
sharply reduces the flocculation salinity.
July 1990 • JPT
 TABLE 1-CLAY COMPOSITIONS AND FLOCCULATION PROPERTIES
Flocculation
Sand/Clay Packs Salinity
Composition Clays Clay Ov (meq/L)
Clay Hectorite Montmorilionite ~ Montmorilioniteilliite"" Kaolinite (%) CEC (meq/mL PV) NaCI ~ Remarks
Smectites
SAz-1" 99+ 690 Ca-montmorilionite
("Cheto"), Apache
County, AZ
Wyoming Bentonite 81 5 0.2 600 88 Drilling-mud bentonite
STx-1" 98+ 540 Ca-montmorilionite
(white), Gonzales
County, TX
SHCa-1" 73 450 Hectorite, San Bernardino
County, CA
Montmorilioniteilliite Mixed Layer
ISMt-1" 96(40/60) 10 3.686 0.198 550 Mancos shale, Montana
Mixed Clay
API-100A 15 46(20/80) 30 10 1.34 0.070 120 API standard, England
Illite
IMt-1" 99+ 10 1.447 0.074 200 36 Cambrian shale, Silver
Hill, MT
Kaolinite
KGa-1" 99+ 2 Kaolinite, well crystaliized,
Washington County, GA
LGa·2" 99+ 17 Kaolinite, poorly
crystallized, Warren
County, GA
'Clay Minerals Soc. "source clay project'· designation .
.. Relative percentage of each clay is given in parentheses.

(Total divalent cations can be represented 3
by equivalent Ca + + ion and are interpret-
ed as such throughout this paper.) As Figs.
1 through 3 show, for smectite, montmor-
illonite/illite mixed-layer, and illite clays,
respectively, a few percent divalent cation
can reduce the flocculation salinity by an or-
der of magnitude. These figures also show
that two distinct types of behavior of floc-
culation salinity vs. divalent cation concen-
tration exist. The smectites and some
montmorillonite/illite mixed-layer clays
have a critical Ca + + concentration that
must be exceeded before the flocculation sa-
linity appreciably decreases with increasing
Ca + + concentration. The flocculation sa-
linities for other clays continuously decrease
with increasing Ca + + concentration. The
reason for this difference is not known.
Effect of Temperature. Khilar and
Fogler4 show only a mild effect of temper-
ature on flocculation salinity. Their data in-
dicate that the flocculation salinity doubles
with an increase of about 155°F [68°C]. As
Table 2 shows, however, high-temperature
formation clays were not particularly sen-
sitive to water salinity, which indicates that
increasing formation temperature (and thus
depth) decreases the formation-clay floccu-
lation salinity. Because of these compensat-
ing temperature effects, the flocculation-
salinity criteria presented here, developed
primarily at about 75°F [24°C], are consid-
ered adequate for evaluating injection-water
compatibility for most reservoirs.
Procedure for Determining Flocculation
Salinity. Flocculation salinities for pure
clays, quarry stones, and reservoir cores
were determined by flowing continuously

TABLE 2-CORE COMPOSITIONS AND FLOCCULATION PROPERTIES

NaCI
Brine Clays (wt%) Flocculation
Depth Temperatu;e Permeability' Montmorillonite/ Chlorite/ Ov Salinity
Field, Well (tt) (OF) (md) Illite Illite Kaolinite Chlorite Kaolinite (meq/mL) (meq/L)
--- ------
Montmorillonite Response
lowa b 4,417 135 800 to 1,100 3 4{65/35) 1 600
Montmorillonite/Illite Mixed-
Layer Response
Big Foot 3,302 130 0.08 to 0.15 15 7 to 15(95/5) 9 to 23 0.64 to 0.69 470
Belridge 6,049 210 3 to 7 7 18{55/45) 370
6,050 6 4 6{50/50) 1
6,050.3 2.5 4 1 310
8,718 8 to 9 3 3{15/85) Trace 320
Illite Response
Middle Ground Shoal 6,629 135 0.5 to 3 11 to 27 6 to 21 0.05 200
South Pass 7,630 170 90 to 125 10 6{20/80) 0.10 72
Eugene Island 10,136 200 1,000 to 4,000 21 6{20/80) 2 0.13 72
Upper Prairie du Chien 10,379 170 0.25 3 1 - 230
Green Canyon 13,107 150 1,100 7 7{50/50) 0.1 0.11 200
Bandera Quarry stone - 30 17 8 0.06 300
Berea Quarry stone - - 1 6 1 - 68
Kaolinite Response
Berea Quarry stone - 70 5 0.03 17
Small to No Response C
d
AWP Olmos 9,747 to 9,748 250 0.003 to 0,02 22{25/75) 6{98% chlorite)
EI Grullo 10,100 0.06 13 4 e
240
f
Lower Prairie du Chien 10,858 170 0.003 Trace
Fandango 15,591 400 0.2 to 1.6 1 9 9

a Preserved cores; thus, tor oil-bearing formations, these are residual-oil-saturation permeabilities.
bOld core, poor quality.
'These cores were not sensitive to slow dilution to deionized water; however, some responded to abrupt change from l-N brine to deionized water.
dNo response to deionized water after l-N KCI and 3% NH.CI brines; however, no response after 3% NH.CI at 400°F .
• Response to deionized water after NaCI and KCI at room temperature; however, no response after 3% NH 4 CI at 400°F.
f No response to deionized water upon abrupt switching after log dilution to 80 meq NaCI brine.
9 No response to deionized water after I·N NaCI brine.

JPT • July 1990 837

 bined into the generalized flocculation sa-
WYOMING BENTONITE o SA -1
SHCa-l =-z- linity diagrams for typically encountered
C 5 Tx-l
o IOWA CORE clay types in Fig. 4. Water compositions fall
into four composition zones. Zone A waters,
above and to the right of the flocculation-
salinity line, are compatible and, under equi-
librium conditions, will keep clays floccu-
lated. Zone B waters have inadequate total
and/or divalent cation concentrations to keep
~
.
~
E 50
clays flocculated and will be impairing. The
farther to the left of the flocculation-salinity
line and the lower the total cation concentra-
Z
0
~a:
tion in Zone B, the greater the potential im-
.... pairment. Zone C waters result in the frac-
z
w
() 10 tion of divalent cation exchange sites being
z above the critical value but can result in
0
()

Z
some generally tolerable impairment levels.
0
Because we cannot predict how much im-
~
() pairment would result, Zone C waters
-'
<
.... should be used only as a last resort. Zone
0
.... D (shaded) is the range in flocculation sa-
linities obtained for clays from various
0.5
sources. The compatibility of Zone D waters
cannot be generalized, and more specific in-
formation is required. Flocculation-salinity
data from core flow tests are best. When
these data are not available, formation-water
0.1 L.....J'---''---''---'--L---L--L---L_ 10~"""''''''''''''~1~0'''''''-
o 10 composition, Table 2, and Fig. 5 can be
DIVALENT CATION, PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS used to match formation-clay composition
and depth to cores with known flocculation
salinities. To this end, it is assumed that con-
Fig. 1-Flocculation-salinity diagrams for smectite clays. nate water and reservoir clays are compat-
ible. Therefore, connate water establishes an
diluting brine through a sand/clay pack or loss in permeability. Their Berea core con-
upper bound for the most sensitive clay type.
core until the clays were deflocculated, as tained about S wt % clays made of 71 %
indicated by an injection pressure increase kaolinite, 15 % illite/mica, and 14 % chlo- InJection.Water Evaluation
caused by clay-particle release, migration, rite. At lower percentages, permeability Guidelines
and pore-throat plugging. The brine was decreases drastically when the cores are con-
diluted with Khilar et ai. 's5 stirred-vessel tacted with deionized water. Experimental The following guidelines are presented for
using the flocculation salinity diagrams in
technique. Appendix A in Ref. 6 details the data indicate that the critical fractions of
Figs. 4 and 5 to determine whether an in-
test procedure. divalent sites for montmorillonite, illite, and
jection water is compatible with formation
kaolinite clays are about 0.95, O.SO, and
clays at equilibrium conditions. Injection-
Critical-Fraction Divalent Cation Ex- <0.30, respectively. and formation-water cation analyses and X-
change Sites. Kia et ai. 7 show that when ray analysis of formation clay types, includ-
divalent cations occupy more than SO% of Water-Compatibility Criteria. The floccu- ing glycolation for mixed-layer clay analy-
the cation exchange sites, Berea cores can lation-salinity data of Figs. 1 through 3 and sis, are required.
be flooded with deionized water with little the critical-divalent-cation data are com- 1. The TCC is the sum of mono- and
divalent cations, both in milliequivalents per
SAND/CLAY PACKS
liter. Divalent cations are expressed as the
percent of the TCC. The water composition
is plotted on the flocculation-salinity dia-
1000 1000 gram of the most salinity-sensitive clay pres-
ent. Salinity sensitivity decreases in order:
500
montmorillonite, illite, and kaolinite. Chlo-
rite is not salinity-sensitive. The injection-
'00
water/formation-clay compatibility is then
100 determined by the position of the water com-
position on the diagram, as discussed in the
previous section.
2. Formations above about 250°F
[121°C] generally have little, ifany, fresh-
10 water sensitivity; thus, injection-water sa-
linity should not be a problem.
3. The salinity-sensitivity of montmoril-
lonite/illite mixed-layer clays is variable.
The data suggest that, depending on com-
10
'0L..-'-~-'--"0'--- position, flocculation salinities can range
from that of illite, when the montmorillo-
DIVALENT CATIONS, PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS
nite fraction of the mixed-layer clay is low,
to that of montmorillonite at high montmor-
Fig. 2-Flocculation-salinity diagrams for montmorillonite/illite mixed-layer clays. illonite fractions. Data indicate that forma-

838 July 1990 • JPT

tions containing montmorillonite/illite
IMt-1
mixed-layer clays with montmorillonite frac- ~ MIDDLE GROUND SHOALS

tions of :s 0.2 or that are deeper than about 500 500 500

10,000 ft [3048 m] will respond like illite

and that those with higher montmorillonite
fractions and shallower depths can be ex- 100 SHOWN AS 100 100 \
pected to behave like the mixed-layer clays DASHED LINE
IN OTHER
\
shown in Table 2. 50 FIGURES
50 50 \
4. Connate waters are in equilibrium with
0\
and compatible with their respective forma-
tion clays. Thus, connate water composi- \\
tions lie in Zone A of the flocculation-
salinity diagram. This fact can be useful in
. 10 10 10

\
determining which diagram to use. For ex- ~E \
ample, if both montmorillonite/illite mixed- Z \
layer and illite clays were present and the '"
;; \
a:
connate water composition was in Zone B >-
z
1
0
1
0 10
1
0 10
Ul
of the montmorillonite/illite diagram but in 0
Z
Zone A of the illite diagram, the illite dia- 0
0 ~ EUGENE IS. GREEN CANYON
gram would be the appropriate one to use. z
200 200 200
'"
;;
0
Transition to Injection Water ~
«
100 100
~
During the transition from formation to in-
>-
0
>- 50
\ 50 50 \
jection water, if the fraction of formation-
\ \
clay cation exchange sites occupied by diva-
\ \
lent cations is greater when the formation \ \
is in equilibrium with injection water than 10 \ 10 \
with formation water, divalent cations will \ \
be stripped from the injected water until they
5
\ \
occupy enough cation exchange sites to re- \ \
establish equilibrium. This does not present \ \
a problem when the TCC of the injection 1 1
0 10 0
water is greater than the NaCI flocculation
DIVALENT CATIONS. PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS
salinity for the formation clays. That is, even
without divalent cations, the injection water
has adequate TCC to keep clays flocculated. Fig. 3-Flocculation-salinity diagrams for illite clays.
If divalent cations are required to keep clays
flocculated, however, divalent-cation strip-
ping can result in formation-clay defloccu-
lation and permeability impairment. The
effect of divalent-cation stripping at the Big
Foot waterflood is discussed below.
Fig. 6 shows that both potential water-
flood source waters, Escondido and Carrizo- HOW TO USE
MONTMORILL.ONITE MONT./ILLITE
Wilcox (C-W), are near the Big Foot for- ~
ZONE
-A - COMPATiBLE WATER
mation flocculation-salinity line but are com- 1000 1000 B - IMPAIRING WATER, THE
FURTHER lEFT OF 0 ZONE
patible. However, the fraction of cation
exchange sites occupied by divalent cations
500r===~ __ 500
THE GREATER POTENTIAL
IMPAIRMENT
C - SOME, BUT GENERAllY
ACCEPTABLE IMPAIRMENT
at equilibrium differs considerably for the o- NEED MORE DATA, SEE
TABLE 2 AND FIGURE 8
two waters; hence, their cation stripping
characteristics differ considerably. The frac- 100

tion of Ca + + sites changes from about

15% when in equilibrium with formation 50
water, to about 80% when in equilibrium
20
with C-W water, to about 8% when in equi-
librium with Escondido water. Fig. 7 shows 10

how these changes affect the Ca + + ion

concentration in the injection water front.
The abrupt injection of C-W water decreases
Ca + + ion concentration to a value almost
100 times lower than that resulting from
10
simple dilution from the 400 ppm Ca + + in
DIVALENT CA.TlONS, PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS
formation water to the 21 ppm Ca + + in C-
W water. Nearly all the Ca + + is stripped
from the initial portion of the injected C-W
water. This shifts the water composition to
the left of the flocculation-salinity line and
into the incompatible Zone B region. Be-
cause C-W water contains only 1.05 meq/L
(21 ppm) Ca + + and the Big Foot forma-
tion has a high CEC, 0.64 to 0.69 meq/mL Fig. 4-Salinity criteria for various clay types.

JPT • July 1990 839

 HOW TO USE
MONTMORiLlONITE MONT./ILLITE
1. SUGGEST FLOCCULATION SALINITY
~ TEST FOR lONE 0 WATE RS. SEE
1000 1000 APPENDIX •• OTHERWISE SEE
2 BELOW. 81 .... FOOT, 130~F

~ 2. BEST MATCH CLAY COMPOSITION

500 500 AND DEPTH WITH fORMATIONS
IN TABL! 2 AND USE
CORRESPONDING FLOCCULATION
SALINITY LINE. IF WATER IS TO
THE RIGHT OF LINE, IT IS
NONIMPAIRING.
'00 '00

i\
50 50

, KAOLINITE

'0
...... ~
.'NTONITE
2~IOW"COOE .'
'0 '0

l-~~~~~~NO
2-BIG FoOt
2-G"'I'" CANYON

,
0 10 20
, ,
0 '0

DIVALENT CATIONS, PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS

0
" 10

OII/Al[NT CATIONS. ptRC[tH OF TOTAL

Fig. 5-Zone D flocculation-salinity data. Fig. 6-Composition of Big Foot field

waters.

PV, more than 400 PV is required to provide
the Ca + + ions needed to establish the new
equilibrium. There results a large volume
of C-W water with a Ca + + ion concentra-
tion too low to keep clays flocculated. Fig.
8a shows that abrupt injection of C-W water
into a Big Foot core in equilibrium with Big
Foot formation water decreases permeability
by 80 %. With Escondido water, however,
the fraction of Ca + + sites decreases during
the transition from formation to Escondido
water, and no Ca + + stripping occurs. As
Fig. 7 shows, after dispersion dilution, the
Ca + + ion concentration slowly decreases
to that of Escondido water (94 ppm).
Formation Pretreatment. Saturating the
near-wellbore formation cation exchange
sites with Ca + + eliminates subsequent
divalent-cation stripping from the injection
water. In some cases, KCI or NH 4 Cl brines causes the concentration gradient between
are adequate pretreatments, and using these injected and formation waters to be suffi-
brines for well operations can eliminate the ciently gradual that little Ca + + stripping
need for a CaCl 2 brine pretreatment. Poly- will occur.
meric clay stabilizers can also be used but
are more expensive and can be impairing. Requirements for Pretreatment. Pretreat-
Two principles are involved in the CaCl 2 ment is not required when the injection-
brine pretreatment. water TCC is greater than the NaCI floccu-
1. Saturating cation exchange sites with lation salinity of the most-water-sensitive
Ca + + eliminates subsequent Ca + + strip- clay present. NaCI flocculation salinities for
ping from injected water. Fig. 8b demon- clays are listed in Tables 1 and 2 and shown
in Fig. 4 as the 0% Ca + + ion flocculation
strates the effectiveness of CaCl 2 brine
pretreatment with Big Foot cores. Pretreat- TCC. At lower cation concentrations, the
ment with O.5-N CaCl 2 brine prevented following criteria apply.
damage during the switch to C-W water The amount of divalent-cation stripping
shown in Fig. 8a. The slight permeability that will occur depends on the mass-action
decrease in Fig. 8b, typical of long-term ratio (MAR) of the injection water to that
flow tests, reflects a small accumulation of of the formation water, Fill' The MAR is
debris rather than clay effects. the square of the monovalent cation concen-
2. At distances beyond the pretreated tration divided by that of the divalent
zone, dispersive mixing in the formation cations, both in milliequivalents per milli-

- - WATER Ca++ CONCENTRATION

BIG FOOT CORE, 1300 F
------ Ca++CONC.D URING TRANSITION
FROM FORMATI ON TO INJECTION WATER F", ESCONDIDO" 2.1
CARRIZO-WILCOX Ie-WI" 0.013

FORMATION
." /TEST WATERS\

\. 400 ppm Ca++ 0.2 NaCI

'ESCONDIDO
0.' {I. . . . . . ~~.~.~.~:~.~~...... I ESCONDID~"l":'~~~'~'~~'?'~'I. c-w
ESCONDIDO
94 ppm Ca++ 0.05 COMPUTER DOWN I
'"(3
OJ

CARRIZO-WILCOX ~
:;
21 ppmCai'+
3 O.O~5:::0:-::60:--:7'::'0--:-'80:---:9~0:-3::070-,:l:-0-...l20--3l:0-..J4,:,"0-5J..0-..J6Lo --l370
v C W
-
,:
....
:;
~
OJ
a

~ 0.5
0.4 O.5N

I.J . I. . . . . . ~~.~~I.:~:.~~~~ox
CaGI2

0.3
0.2
..... :.<?~~.~~I.'?~ ... . .I.':'~'~~'~~~~~
.............. .
k 1.0 -0.94
0.3 ppm Ca++
5 O.10:--~'O:--;;20;:--;;3';;-0--;!;'0;---;5::-0--:6:::0---:..70:----:81:-
0- -:1:
90,.--."s,'OO
2 4 6 '0
b TIME, HOURS
PORE VOLUMES INJECTED

Fig. 7-Ca + + ion stripping by Big Foot formation during tran- Fig. 8-Effect of F//f flow test response data: (a) no pretreat-
sition from formation to injection water. ment; (b) with CaCI 2 pretreatment.

840 July 1990 • JPT

liter-MAR=[Na+J2/[Ca+ 2 ]. For the CONDITIONS:
purpose of determining CaCI 2 pretreatment - 20-1NCH SAND/CLAY PACK, 72 g F
10% IMt-1 ILLITE
requirements, formation water is the water r/J .. 35%
in the formation that is being displaced by - STABILIZE WITH BIG FOOT FORMATION WATER

an injected water. In this context, formation - PRETREAT WITH 1.2N CaCI 2 BRINE
- START C-W WATER INJECTION
water can be drilling-mud filtrate or comple-
- FRONTAL ADVANCE RATES
tion, workover, or stimulation fluids. To de- 56.Scc/hr. .. 25 FT JDAY
24 cc/hr .. 11 FT !DAY
termine the critical Fill below which clay
deflocculation occurs, flow tests were run
with a series of decreasing Fill brines and
the injection pressure response observed as kTESl1

one brine displaced the other. When Fill is P~~~~~A~R1A'!;O lee, 1.2N CaCI.:2 _TE_ST_~~ AFTER 24 HRS.
START C-W WATER TAEATS 4.1' OF" PACK 4cc, 1.2N GaGI.:2 7.5 PV tNJ.
lower than critical values and the injection- INJECTION INJ. RATE T:;~~~~;:~~J~FR=~~I( k/k "O.59

water TCC is lower than the minimum NaCI BIG FOOT

FORMATION
1 FINES
RELEASED
I'~
,,-~.~,,~'~SC:::.o_ _ _ _ _ _--1-_ _-..,
~,,,,.,,,
O

AFTER 24 HRS.
flocculation salinity, formation pretreatment I-_W_"_E_R-l.+
'\ _ _ _"-_ _ _ _~:::::::...
_ _ __ . : : _ - - - - - - - - - - - k/ko~l
is required. ,~ Sec, 1,2N CaCI2
TREATS ENTIRE PACK
24cc/hr, INJ. RATE

Pretreatment Propagation and Radius. "

T1ME, HOURS
Fig. 9 shows the results of tests to determine
the effectiveness of a small-volume, high-
concentration CaCl 2 brine pretreatment in Fig. 9-Laboratory CaCI 2 brine pretreatment tests.
stabilizing clays as it propagates ahead of
an injection water. In this test, a 20-in.
[51-cm] sand/clay pack was used to simu- k/kO FOR IMPAIRED ZONE 110 FT)

late formation rock. The pack PV was about 1.0

~_ _- - - - - - - - - O.B
180 mL, and 1 mL of 1.2-N CaCI 2 brine
solution has enough Ca + + to treat the clay ~_ _- - - - - 0.5
in about a 4-in. [lO-cm] length of pack. Fig. o
12 summarizes the results of tests run with ~
a:
1, 4, and 5 mL of 1.2-N CaCI 2 solution
pretreatments. In these tests, 1 mL treated
...>- 0.2

about 20% of the pack length, and severe ...>

(J
MODEL
impairment resulted when the following ,
UJ

@
Z
PROTECTED
low-salinity C-W injection water overran the "
pretreated zone. About 4 mL of 1.2-N HI..? ZONE

CaCl 2 solution treated about 80% of the
pack clay, and the injectivity was reduced
by about 40 % upon injection of C-W water.
The 5-mL treatment had sufficient Ca + +
ion to treat all the pack clay and, as shown,
the transition to injection water was made
with no impairment. These tests demonstrate
that a small, high-concentration CaCI 2
brine slug will propagate and adequately
treat clays ahead of an advancing injection-
water front.
We did not study the effect of pump rate
(frontal velocity) on CaCI 2 brine treatment
effectiveness, but we suggest that pretreat-
ments be placed at rates recommended for
sandstone matrix acidizing treatments, 0.25
to 0.5 bbl/min [0.04 to 0.08 m 3 /min]. Slow
rates increase the near-wellbore contact time
and allow diffusion to enhance Ca + + dis-
tribution. The treatments shown in Fig. 9
were pumped at rates corresponding to a
frontal advance of 11 and 25 ftlD [3.4 and
7.6 mid].
Two considerations are important in pre-
treatment-volume selection: the effect on in-
jectivity of impairment deep in the reservoir
and the radial distance required to develop
dispersion dilution profiles adequate to pre-
vent deflocculation of clays in the near-
wellbore region.
10 •
FT
0.2
IMPAIRED ZONE
I ALWAYS 10 FTl
RADIUS OF PROTECTED INO IMPAIRMENTI ZONE. FT.
Fig. 10-Effect of distance from well bore of Impaired zone on injectivity.
TABLE 3-CRITERIA FOR REQUIRING FORMATION PRETREATMENT"
Smectite (montmorillonite) or montmorillonite/illite mixed-layer (> 20% montmorillonite
and < 10,000 ft)
Suggested when 0.5:s;F ilf <1.0
Recommended when F ilf < 0.5
Montmorilionitelillite mixed-layer « 20% montmorillonite or > 10,000 ft) or illite
Suggested when 0.3:s; F ilf < 0.5
Recommended when Filf < 0.3
Kaolinite
Suggested when 0.15:s; Fill < 0.3
Recommended when F ilf <0.15
Chlorite
Chlorite is not freshwater-sensitive and pretreatment is not required
Formation pretreatment is suggestedlrecommended when formations contain these clay types and F '" ratios
are in the ranges shown. When several clay types are present, pretreatment requirements are based on the most-
salinity·sensitive clay present. The clays are listed in order of decreaSing salinity sensitivity.
Pretreatment is suggested when laboratory data showed that F '" would result in about 20% stabilized permeability
impairment. This level of impairment may not be relevant in field operalions, but pretreatment is suggested if
costs are not prohibitive. At lower FII , values, increasingly severe impairment resulted and pretreatment is
recommended.

Some impairment is tolerable, provided F'I' =[N,+ ]2 / [Ca,+2]/[Na,+ ]2/[Ca,+2].

that it is far enough from the wellbore. Fig.

10 shows the effect of treatment radius on
the injectivity of a well with a lO-ft [3-m]
-wide impaired band. If impairment devel-
ops when the injection water overruns the
treated zone, how large would the near-

JPT • July 1990 841

 well bore treatment zone have to be to mini-
TABLE 4-COMPLETION, STIMULATION, AND WORKOVER BRINE GUIDELINES
FOR INJECTORS (NO FLOWBACK) mize the effect on well injectivity of any fur-
ther impairment? As shown, treating to a
With Smectite-Response Clays radius of about 5 ft [1,5 m] will reduce the
Smectite (Montmorillonite) and Montmorillonite/Illite Mixed-Layer effect of impairment farther out in the reser-
(> 20% montmorillonite and < 10,000 It) voir. Thus, on the basis of radial injectivity
Injection-Water TCC Acceptable Necessary MAR only, at least a 5-ft [I.5-m] minimum should
(meq/L) Operations Brines' Calculations' • be treated.
~600 Injection water A critical parameter that can determine the
~4% NaCI degree of impairment from cation stripping
~2% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI is the rate of transition from formation water
~1% CaCI 2 to injection water. Dilution experiments of
Seawater the type described in Appendix A in Ref. 6
Any brine (TCC ~ 600) showed that if the transition is slow enough,
Any brine (TCC < 600) Fbi!
then damage from cation stripping is mini-
600 > TCC~ 120 Injection water Fbi!
~4% NaCI Pretreat with KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI, CaCI 2 mal. In practice, we want to know the dis-
~2% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI tance from the well at which dispersion will
~ 1% CaCI 2 produce a gentle transition that yields mini-
Seawater Filb mum impairment. Nondamaging transition
Any brine (TCC ~ 600) Filb rates, determined with Big Foot cores, along
Any brine (TCC < 600) Fbi! and Filb with Big Foot and C-W injection waters in
< 120 Injection water Fbi! stirred cells (see Appendix A in Ref. 6),
~4% NaCI Pretreat with CaCI 2 were compared with dispersion curves gen-
~2% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI Pretreat with CaCI 2
erated with a reservoir simulator. Under
~ 1% CaCI 2
Seawater typical injection conditions and assuming ra-
Filb
Any brine (TCC~600) Filb
dial flow, it appears that the transition from
Any brine (TCC < 600) Fbi! and Filb formation to injection water past about 10
ft [3m] is slow enough to minimize damage
With Illite-Response Clays
from cation stripping. Thus, 10 ft [3 m] is
Montmorillonite/Illite Mixed-Layer
( < 20% montmorillonite or > 10,000 tt) the maximum treatment radius that should
be considered,
~ 100 Injection water
~2% NaCI
~1% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI
Fonnation Pretreatment Guidelines. For-
~0.5% CaCI 2 mation pretreatment is suggested or recom-
Seawater mended when (1) the injection-water TCC is
Any brine (TCC ~ 100) less than the NaCI flocculation salinity of the
Any brine (TCC < 100) Fbi! most-water-sensitive clay present and (2) the
100>TCC~20 Injection water Fbi! FilJ is less than the guideline values in Ta-
~2% NaCI Pretreat with KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI; CaCI 2 ble 3, The pretreatment "suggested" cate-
~1% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI
gory is based on laboratory flow tests when
~0.5% CaCI 2
Seawater
the FilJ resulted in < 20 %, stabilized, per-
Filb
Any brine (TCC ~ 100) meability impairment. This impairment level
Filb
Any brine (TCC< 100) F bIf and Fill may not be relevant in field operations, but
<20 Injection water Fbi! pretreatment is suggested if costs are not
~2% NaCI Pretreat with CaCI 2 prohibitive. At lower FilJ values, increas-
2!:1% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI Pretreat with CaCI 2 ingly severe impairment resulted, and pre-
~0.5% CaCI 2 treatment is recommended.
Seawater Filb Formation CEC. The FilJ criteria are
Any brine (TCC ~ 100) Filb based on sand/clay packs and cores with a
Any brine (TCC<100) Fbi! and F ilb
CEC, Qv, less than 0.2-meq/mL PV.
With Kaolinite-Response Clays Divalent-cation stripping increases with in-
Kaolinite creasing formation Qv. Thus, for forma-
~ 10 Injection water tions with Qv>0.2 meq/mL, pretreatment
~1% NaCI is recommended for the higher FilJ ranges
~0.5% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI shown; i.e., suggested pretreatments be-
~0.1% CaCI 2 come recommended. .
Seawater Choice of Pretreatment Brine. As dis-
Any brine (TCC ~ 10) cussed in Well-Operations Brine Selection,
Any brine (TCC < 10) Fbi!
Injection water
Table 4 can be used to determine what
<10 Fbi!
~1% NaCI Pretreat with KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI, CaCI 2 pretreatment brine to use. Generally, KCl
~0.5% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI and NH4Ci brines are adequate pretreat-
~0.1% CaCI 2 ments and can be used when these tables in-
Seawater Filb dicate that a CaCl 2 brine pretreatment is
Any brine (TCC ~ 10) Filb not required.
Any brine (TCC < 10) F bIf and Filb Pretreatment Brine Volume Require-
ments. General pretreatment brine volume
'Injection water and any brines must be Zone A, clay·compatible . requirements are given by
. . F'lb =MAR of injection water/MAR of operations brine. If pretreatment is required on the basis of Table 3, pretreat
before injection. Vb =QvV/Cb' ................. (1)
F blf = MAR of operations brine/MAR of formation water. If pretreatment is required on the basis of Table 3, pretreat
before well operations.
where Vb = volume of brine per foot of
Check for scaling when injection water, formation water, seawater, CaGI 2 , and any brines are mixed with each other. open interval to treat Vp , bbllft; Vp = PV
MAR of seawater = 1.76.
per foot of open interval for desired radial

842 July 1990 • JPT

 TABLE 5-COMPLETION, STIMULATION, AND WORKOVER BRINE GUIDELINES FOR PRODUCERS AND INJECTORS
WITH FORMATION-WATER FLOW BACK
Brine Acceptable and F bit Calculations Required When
Formation Water TCC is in Range"
(meq/L)
Formation-Clay Type Operations Brines' Acceptable FbIf Ftlb Acceptable Fblt Ft/b
TCC2:600 TCC < 600
Smectite Response
Smectites (montmorillonite) 2:4% NaCI Yes No
2:2% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI Yes Yes
Montmorillonite (> 20%)/ il- 2: 1% CaCI 2 Yes Yes
lite mixed layer Seawater Yes X
< 10,000 It Any brine (TCC 2: 600) Yes X
Any brine (TCC < 600) X X X
TCC2: 100 TCC< 100
Illite Response
Montmorillonite « 20%)/ 2:2% NaCI Yes No
illite mixed tayer 2:1% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI Yes Yes
or > 10,000 It 2:0.5% CaCI 2 Yes Yes
Illite Seawater Yes X
Any brine (TCC 2: 100) Yes X
Any brine (TCC < 100) X X X
TCC2:10 TCC<10
Kaolinite Response 2: 1% NaCI Yes No
2:0.5% KCI, NH 4 CI, HCI Yes Yes
2:0.1% CaCI 2 Yes Yes
Seawater Yes X
Any brine (TCC 2: 10) Yes X
Any brine (TCC < 10) X X X

'''Any brines" must be Zone A, clay·compatible. Also check for scaling when formation water is mixed with any brine, seawater, or CaCI 2 .
**"No" indicates that, because of excessive divalent-cation stripping from formation water during backflow, the brine should not be used for wett operations. An "X" indicates
that the MAR calculation should be made to determine whether a formation pretreatment is required. If F blf (brine displacing formation water) or F fib (formation water dis·
placing brine) indicates that a pretreatment is required, use another brine.

treatment distance out from the wellbore,
bbllft {Vp =0.5589<1>(r; +0.5305rs ) in bbll
ft, where rs = pretreatment radius, ft, <I> =
porosity, and 7-in. [17.8-cm] casing is as-
sumed}; and Cb = pretreatment brine con-
centration, meq cation/mL. For KCI, Cb =
0.14(wt% KCI); for CaCI 2 , Cb =0.18(wt%
CaCI 2 ); and for NH 4 Cl, Cb =0.19(wt%
NH 4 CI). For simplicity, these equations
are based on the total formation CEC. This
provides a conservative estimate because the
fraction of exchange sites already occupied
by Ca + + when in equilibrium with forma-
tion brine is not included.
Minimum Pretreatment Volumes. Re-
gardless of calculated volume requirements,
very small pretreatment volumes are not rec-
ommended. Volumes large enough to
achieve adequate distribution throughout the
wellbore should be used. We suggest 10 bbl
[1.6 m 3 ] as a minimum pretreatment vol-
ume, no matter how small the interval, be-
cause at smaller volumes the volume of the
wellbore becomes significant.
Additional Considerations During Pre-
treatment With CaCl2 Brine. If the for-
mation water contains sufficient SO 4= ,
HC0 3- , and C0 3= to result in precipitation
of CaS04 or CaC0 3 scales when mixed
with the CaCl 2 pretreatment brine, either a
scale inhibitor can be added to the CaCl 2
brine or a 2 % KCI or NH4 CI spacer can be
used to prevent near-wellbore mixing of the
CaCl 2 brine and formation water. If the in-
jection water is incompatible with CaCl 2
pretreatment brine, a spacer of injection
water treated with scale inhibitor is probably
the simplest solution. When a CaCl 2 or
KCI pretreatment is required after an HF
acid stimulation treatment, a 2 to 3 %
NH4 Cl brine spacer must be used to
separate the Ca + + or K + ions from spent
HF acid to prevent precipitation of calcium
fluoride and calcium or potassium fluorosili-
cates. A sufficient volume of NH4Cl brine
should be used to displace spent HF acid 2
to 3 ft [0.6 to 0.9 m] from the wellbore.
Well.Operations Brine Selection
During well completions, stimulation, or
workovers, the near-wellbore clays come
into equilibrium with the cations of the brine
used for these operations. When water in-
jection is started or the well is put on pro-
duction, the clays will re-establish
equilibrium with the injection or formation
water. As discussed above, divalent-cation
stripping can result in the composition of the
leading portion of the formation water trans-
gressing temporarily into Zone B composi-
tions. Proper selection of the well-operations
brine can eliminate this potential problem.
We developed guidelines for selecting
well-operations brines for the following well
categories: (1) injectors where water injec-
tion begins immediately after well operations
and injection water displaces the well-
operations brine (no flowback); (2) injectors
allowed to flow back and re-establish equi-
librium with formation water before water
injection, whereupon injection water dis-
places formation water (flowback); and
(3) producers where formation water dis-
places the well-operations brine (flowback).
In all cases, divalent -cation stripping is a
concern: with Category I injectors, when
operations brine displaces formation water
and injection water displaces the operations
brine; with Category 2 injectors, when op-
erations brine displaces formation water,
formation water displaces operations brine
(during flowback), and injection water dis-
places formation water when water injection
is initiated; and with producers, when op-
erations brine displaces formation brine and
then again when formation water displaces
the operations brine as the well is placed on
production. We used the following criteria
in developing these guidelines.
1. The brines in Table 4 and Table 5
(NaCl, KCI, NH 4CI, and CaCI 2 ) and sea-
water will keep clays flocculated. Any other
brines used in well operations must have
adequate TCC and divalent cation concen-
tration to keep clays flocculated-i.e., com-
positions in Zone A of the respective clay
flocculation-salinity diagram.
2. As Fig. 11 shows, the flocculation sa-
linity for KCl is about one-sixth that for
NaCl. Also, because NH4+ has the same
hydrated ionic radii as K + and H + is
smaller, NH4 CI brines and acid should
have clay-stabilizing properties equivalent
to KCl brines. For these guidelines, the KCl
flocculation salinity is taken as 20% of that
for NaCl. Thus, when the formation clays
are in equilibrium with these brines, much-
lower-TCC waters can be used without clay
deflocculation.
3. Divalent-cation stripping is allowed for
water/water transitions where the TCC of

JPT • July 1990 843

 CONDITIONS:
- SAND/CLAY PACKS 300r---------------------------~

- LOG DILUTE KCI fNaCI BRINES

WITH DEIONIZED WATER UNTIL 200
CLAY DEFlOCCULATES
- 72°F
100
o WYOMING BENTONITE
o IMt-l1LLlTE 50

-------------- -----------_.
100
10
'" -- -----
PRETREATMENT
Ibbl 11.6 Ib/g,1 C,CI2 BRINE)
------------
50
- - - - - - - NONE

- - - 40
- - - - - 10

1° 0~---:'2':""0--4-'-0-~6':-0--'-eo--c:',oo
TIME. DAYS
K+ CONCENTRATION, PERCENT OF TOTAL CATIONS

Fig. 11-Effect of K + ion on flocculation Fig. 12-Effect of CaCI 2 brine pretreatment on water injectivity at Big Foot field.
salinity.

the displacing brine is equal to or greater
than one-half the NaCI flocculation salinity
of the most-salinity-sensitive clay present,
except for the smectite clays. Then, no
divalent-cation stripping is allowed. The rea-
son is that the Zone B area above 50 % of
the flocculation salinity (zero divalent cation
concentration value) is small, and little clay
deflocculation is expected when divalent cat-
ion concentrations are in this area of Zone B.
4. The suitability of seawater or "any"
brine in well operations is determined by the
MAR criteria of Table 3. If the MAR indi-
"Some impairment is cates that a preflush is required, another
brine is recommended.
tolerable, provided that
it is far enough from
Examples for Injectors With No Flow-
the wellbore. . . . If back. Table 4 summarizes operations brine-
selection guidelines for wells where injection
impairment develops water directly displaces the operations brine
when the injection (no flowback) and shows acceptable opera-
water overruns the tions brines when the injection water has the
TCC given in the left-hand column. The
treated zone, how large right-hand column shows the brine transi-
would the near- -tions that require calculation to determine
wellbore treatment whether a pretreatment is required. Because
a pretreatment requires additional operations
zone have to be to and expense, selecting another operations
minimize the effect on brine, rather than pretreating, is suggested.
Table 4 can be used when the most-salinity-
well injectivity of any sensitive clays present are smectite, illite,
further impairment?" and kaolinite, respectively. Chlorite presents
no problems because it is not salinity-
sensitive.
Example 1. The formation contains a
montmorillonite/illite-mixed-Iayer clay that
is 45 % montmorillonite, and the formation
depth is 5,600 ft [1710 m]. This is a smec-
tite-response-type clay, and the first part of
Table 4 applies. The injection-brine TCC is
350 meq/L; thus, the 600 > TCC ~ 120 por-
tion applies. The right-hand column shows
that if an NaCI operations brine were used,
a KCI, NH 4CI, or CaCl 2 pretreatment
would be required before water injection.
If the operations brine were KCI, NH4 CI,
or acid, however, pretreatment would not
be required.
Example 2. The same conditions apply as
for Example 1, but the injection-water TCC
is 80 meq/L. As shown in the right-hand
column of the first part of Table 4, a CaCl 2
brine pretreatment is required before water
injection even when KCI or NH4 CI opera-
tions brines or acid is used. Thus, using a
CaCl 2 operations brine would eliminate the
need for pretreating. The Big Foot water-
flood exemplifies this case.
Examples for Producers and Injectors
With Flowback. Table 5 is for producers
and injectors where formation-water flow-
back is allowed before injection. The right-
hand columns show two things.
1. Operations brines acceptable when the
formation water has TCC values in the
ranges shown are given. "No" means that
excessive divalent-cation stripping from the
leading portions of the formation water
occurs as it displaces the operations brine
when the well is flowed back.
2. The times when FblJ and FJlb calcula-
tions are required are indicated by an "x."
FblJ is the MAR calculation for brine dis-
placing formation water (brine MAR divided
by formation-water MAR), and FJlb is that
for formation water flowing back and dis-
placing the operations brine. If Table 3
MAR criteria indicate that a preflush is re-
quired, use another operations brine.
Example 1. The formation contains a
smectite-response montmorillonite/illite
mixed-layer clay, and the formation-water
TCC is less than 600 meq/L. Table 5 shows
that NaCl brine would not be an acceptable
operations brine. KCI, NH 4CI, and CaCl 2
brines and acid are acceptable. The use of
seawater or another brine (such as produced
water) requires the calculation of the MAR.
Example 2. Same conditions apply as for
Example 1, except "any brine" with TCC

844 July 1990. JPT

 < 600 meq/L is considered for a well work-
over. The first step is to be sure that the
"any brine" composition is in Zone A for
the particular smectite-response clay pres-
ent. To do this, calculate the TCC and per-
cent divalent cations and plot them on the
appropriate diagram of Fig. 4. If the water
is in Zone A, proceed with the Fbi! and Fflb
calculations as indicated by the" x" in those
columns. If neither indicates that a pretreat-
ment is required, then "any brine" is ac-
ceptable.
Big Foot Field Test
In the Big Foot field waterflood, the FiI! ra-
tio with C-W injection water (TCC= 14
meq/L) is 0.013, and severe divalent-cation
stripping will occur if C-W water is injected
without pretreatment. In core flow tests, an
80% permeability decrease resulted upon
direct injection of C-W water (Fig. 8a).
When a CaCI 2 brine pretreatment was
used, however, the transition to C-W water
was made with no effect on core permea-
bility (Fig. 8b).
CaCI 2 brine pretreatments have been
uscd in the Big Foot field waterflood-
expansion project. Producers are being con-
verted to injectors after reconditioning with
a 7 '12 % HCIIl '12 % HF stimulation treat-
ment. A 40-bbl [6.4-m 3], 3% NH 4CI over-
flush/spacer is used between the HCIIHF
acid and the CaCI 2 brine to prevent mixing
with spent HCIIHF and precipitation of cal-
cium fluorosilicates.
As Table 4 shows, the NH4 CI overflush
was not an adequate pretreatment because
the TCC of the C-W water (14 meq/L) was
well below the 120-meq/L limit for using
KCI and NH 4 CI brines as pretreatments for
montmorillonite/illite mixed-layer clays. For
TCC< 120, the right-hand column of Table
5 shows that KCI, NH 4 CI, and acid require
a CaCI 2 pretreatment.
Initial pretreatments were designed for
about a IO-ft [3-m] radius (40 bbl [6.4 m 3]
of 11.6-lbm/gal [1390-kg/m3] CaCl 2 brine
per 30 ft [9 m] of open interval). Although
these wells have propped fractures, pretreat-
ment designs are based on radial geometry
for lack of a better design criterion. Pretreat-
ment size was subsequently reduced to a 5-ft
[1.5-m] radius, 10 bbl [1.6 m 3] of 11.6-
Ibm/gal [1390-kg/m3] CaCI 2 . Initial results
are encouraging. As Fig. 12 shows, wells
JPT • July 1990
pretreated with CaCl 2 had two to eight Authors
times better injectivity than those that were
not. Initial results indicated that a 5-ft
[1.5-m] treatment radius is adequate.
Comment Regarding Field Evaluation.
Formation pretreatments alleviate near-well-
bore impairment problems upon water injec-
tion. Farther out in the reservoir, dispersion
mixing prevents excessive divalent-cation
stripping. Because the near-wellbore tran-
sition time is relatively short, pretreatment
effectiveness should be apparent during the Scheuerman Bergersen
first few days of injection. Thus, early-time
Ronald F. Scheuerman retired as a
injectivity data should provide the best eval-
senior staff research chemist at Shell
uation of pretreatment effectiveness. Development Co. 's Bellaire Research
Center. He worked on drilling, comple-
Conclusions tion, and stimulation fluids for 27 years.
We successfully used experimentally deter- Barbara M. Bergersen is a staff pro-
mined flocculation salinity diagrams to duction engineer at Shell Develop-
predict salinity-related formation damage ment's Bellaire Research Center. She
has worked in production and reservoir
and to select workover and injection fluids. engineering for 11 years.
To apply the methods discussed, one must
know water compositions, reservoir clay
types, and reservoir CEC's. Further details ticle Release in Water Sensitive Sandstones,"
and examples of field applications appear in paper 63C presented the 1985 Spring Natl.
Ref. 6. Our work shows that 2 % KCl solu- Meeting of the American Inst. of Chemical En-
tions or 4 % NaCI solutions prevent defloc- gineers, Houston, March 24-28.
culation of all freshwater-sensitive clays.
51 Metric Conversion Factors
References bbl x 1.589 873 E-Ol m'
1. Van Olphen, H.: An Introduction to Clay Col- ft x 3.048* E-Ol m
OF (OF-32)/1.8 °C
loid Chemistry, Interscience Publishers, New
gal X 3.785412 E-03 m'
York City (1961) 24-25.
in. X 2.54* E+OO = em
2. Vinegar, H.J. and Waxman, M.H.: "Induced E-Ol = kg
Ibm X 4.535924
Polarization of Shaly Sands-The Effect of
Clay Counter-Ion Type," Trans., SPWLA .. Conversion factor is exact.
25th Annual Logging Symposium, New
Orleans (June 10-13, 1984) II, Paper LLL.
3. Hill, H.J. and Lake, L.W.: "Cation Exchange
Provenance
in Chemical Flooding: Part 3-Experimental," Original SPE manuscript, Injection-Water
SPEJ (Dec. 1978) 445-56. Salinity, Formation Pretreatment, and
4. Khilar, K.C. and Fogler, H.S.: "The Exis- Well Operations Fluid-Selection Guide-
tence of a Critical Salt Concentration for Par-
ticle Release," J. Colloid Interface Sci. (1984)
lines, received for review Feb. 8, 1989.
Paper accepted for publication May 3, 1990.
101, No. I, 214-24.
Revised manuscript received Jan. 12, 1990.
5. Khilar, K.C., Fogler, H.S., and Ahluwalia,
J.S.: "Sandstone Water Sensitivity: Existence Paper (SPE 18461) first presented at the
of a Critical Rate of Salinity Decrease for Par- 1989 SPE IntI. Symposium on Oilfield
ticle Capture," Chern. Eng. Sci. (1983) 38, Chemistry held in Houston, Feb. 8-10.
No.5, 789-800.
6. Scheuerman, R.F. and Bergersen, B.M.: JPT
"Supplement to SPE 18461, Injection-Water
Salinity, Formation Pretreatment, and Well- SPE 21298, "Supplement to SPE 18461,
Operations Fluid-Selection Guidelines," paper
SPE 21298 available from SPE Book Order
Injection-Water Salinity, Formation
Dept., Richardson, TX. Pretreatment, and Well-Operations Fluid
7. Kia, S.F., Ahluwalia, J.S., and Fogler, H.S.: Selection Guidelines," available from SPE
"Effect of Sodium and Calcium Ions on Par- Book Order Dept.
845