Improvements in Horizontal Gravel Packing

Brian Edment Companies have been slow to adopt openhole gravel packs for inclined and horizontal
Baku, Azerbaijan
well completions. This reluctance centered on operator concerns about the detrimental
Fraser Elliott effects of gravity on gravel placement around sand-exclusion screens. Today, however,
John Gilchrist
Brian Powers these attitudes are changing. Improved techniques, specialized screens, numerous
BP
Baku, Azerbaijan
successful installations and a proven record have increased confidence in the long-
term performance of this technique for controlling sand influx in high-angle wellbores.
René Jansen
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA

Tim McPike
Shell Exploration & Production Americas
Houston, Texas, USA
Henry Onwusiri
Shell UK Exploration & Production
Aberdeen, Scotland
Mehmet Parlar
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Allan Twynam
BP
Sunbury, England
Aart van Kranenburg
Shell Exploration & Production Europe
Stavanger, Norway
FIV (Formation Isolation Valve), MudSOLV and QUANTUM
are marks of Schlumberger. Alternate Path and AllPAC
are marks of ExxonMobil; this technology is licensed
exclusively to Schlumberger.
1. Sherlock-Willis TM, Morales RH and Price P: “A Global
Perspective on Sand Control Treatments,” paper
SPE 50652, presented at the SPE European Petroleum
Conference, The Hague, October 20–22, 1998.
Parlar M and Albino EH: “Challenges, Accomplishments,
and Recent Developments in Gravel Packing,” Journal of
Petroleum Technology 52, no. 1 (January 2000): 50–58.
2. Tiffin D, Stevens B, Park E, Elliott F and Gilchrist J:
“Evaluation of Filter Cake Flowback in Sand Control
Completions,” paper SPE 68933, presented at the SPE
European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague,
May 21–22, 2001.
3. Ali S, Dickerson R, Bennett C, Bixenman P, Parlar M,
Price-Smith C, Cooper S, Desroches L, Foxenberg B,
Godwin K, McPike T, Pitoni E, Ripa G, Steven B, Tiffin D
and Troncoso J: “High-Productivity Horizontal Gravel
Packs,” Oilfield Review 13, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 52–73.
The number of directional and extended-reach
wells increased dramatically during the past
fifteen years, especially offshore. Operators
complete many of these wells as open holes
because of the high cost and difficulty of
cementing casing and of achieving clean,
effective perforations. Long openhole sections
with large inflow areas have higher productivities
than cased-and-perforated completions and are
not as sensitive to drilling or completion damage.
However, these types of completions still require
reliable sand-control measures (next page).
Gravel packing, an effective and widely used
technique, places a granular filter media, or
gravel, around metal sand-exclusion screens
inside perforated casing or open hole. The gravel
is round, well-sorted, clean natural sand or
synthetic materials sized to exclude individual
formation grains and smaller rock particles, or
fines—commonly referred to as produced
sand—while being held in place by the screens.
Completion operations involve pumping
slurries of gravel and a carrier fluid into the
annulus around a screen assembly. The gravel is
deposited as carrier fluid leaks into the
formation or circulates back to surface through a
wash pipe inside the screens and a tubing
workstring. Gravel packs, used extensively in
vertical wells for decades, were less common for
high-angle and horizontal open holes in some
areas, until recently.
Sand control for open holes traditionally
consisted of stand-alone screens without gravel
packs or, more recently, expandable screens.
Stand-alone screens, however, often fail
prematurely. Operators attribute these failures
to incomplete borehole cleanout and partially
plugged screens, which result in “hot spots,” or
converging flow.1
Concentrated inflow at discrete points leads to
increased pressure drops, screen erosion,
increased sand production and, ultimately, to a
decline in well productivity. Newer expandable
screens are run with an initial diameter that is
smaller than the open hole, and then they are
extruded against the borehole wall. These systems
show promise for some sand-control applications
if the expanded screens are strong enough to
resist rock failure and sand influx.2
However, if expandable screens are not
compliant enough to seal tightly against washed-
out and enlarged or irregular boreholes, their
effectiveness may be only marginally better than
stand-alone screens. Removing trapped filtercake
after screen expansion also is a concern. Frequent
screen-only failures led many operators to attempt
more openhole gravel-pack (OHGP) completions.3
Incomplete gravel packs and ineffective
control of sand caused by early job termination,
or screenout, resulting from annular blockage,
or bridges, represent significant economic
and operational risks for operators. A single
sand-control completion offshore costs several
million US dollars. Remedial interventions to
clean out sand and repair wellbore damage often
cost up to a million US dollars and involve
significant production downtime.

50 Oilfield Review
In-Situ Consolidation and Selective or Oriented Perforating

Horizontal Stand-Alone Screen in Open Hole

Cement Intermediate
casing
Open hole
Resin
Production packer Screens

Perforations Filtercake

Production
casing

Screens

Cased-Hole Gravel Pack

Expandable Sand Screen (ESS)

Blank pipe Intermediate
casing
Expanded screens
Production packer
Screens
Running screens

Perforations Filtercake
Gravel

Production
casing
Screens

Cased-Hole Frac Pack

Intermediate Horizontal Openhole Gravel Pack (OHGP)

Blank pipe casing
Gravel
Gravel-pack packer Screens

Gravel
Filtercake

Gravel

Production
Fracture
casing

Screens

> Sand-control methods. In-situ chemical consolidation and selective or oriented perforating in cemented casing with positive zonal isolation avoids
weaker zones or minimizes sand influx (top left). Cased-hole gravel packs control sand in laminated formations, lower quality sands and marginally
economic vertical wells (middle left). Frac packs and screenless completions combine stimulation and sand control in reservoirs with layered pay zones,
poorly sorted grains or low fluid transmissibility (bottom left). In open hole, stand-alone screens control sand in formations with large well-sorted grains and
in wells with short producing lives (top right). Expandable sand screen (ESS) systems provide viable well completions, but long-term reliability has not been
established (middle right). At high inclination angles, an openhole gravel pack (OHGP) often maintains well productivity or injectivity longer than other
methods (bottom right).

Spring 2005 51
 This article reviews openhole gravel-packing
techniques, including water packing and shunt-
tube technology, which achieve higher sustained
production and more consistent sand control in
high-angle and horizontal wells than other types of
completions. A case history from Nigeria describes
the water-packing technique and postinstallation
evaluation of OHGP results in a mature,
heterogeneous reservoir with depleted pressure.
A second case history presents the evolution
of sand-control completions in the Caspian Sea
offshore Azerbaijan. This example reviews the
relative performance of different sand-control
completions, including measures taken to
improve OHGP performance while reducing
reservoir damage.
Sand-Control Methods
Produced sand, or sanding, causes problems
ranging from environmental concerns related to
facility cleanouts, processing interruptions and
proper disposal on the surface, to erosion of
subsurface or surface equipment and potential
loss of well control. Excessive sand influx can
cause tubular or completion equipment failures
downhole that delay production or result in lost
reserves if the cost to sidetrack or redrill a well
is prohibitive.4
In the past, operators often had to restrict, or
choke back, well production to levels below the
critical inflow rate that initiated sanding.
Operators successfully used this strategy in some
areas to delay installation of sand-control
measures, thus reducing upfront costs and
avoiding initial completion damage, or high skin.
However, restricting production adversely
impacts profitability and may be impractical,
especially for high-cost, high-rate deepwater and
subsea wells.
Companies also used in-situ chemical consoli-
dation to lock formation grains in place by
injecting resins and catalysts into formations,
generally through perforations in casing. However,
placing chemicals across large zones and all
perforations is difficult.5
Various techniques are available to exclude
sand from produced fluids, including chemical
consolidation, cased-hole gravel packs, selective
or oriented perforating, hydraulic fracturing, frac
packs that combine fracture stimulation and
gravel packing, stand-alone or expandable
screens, screenless completions and openhole
gravel packs.
Depending on specific conditions and factors,
these techniques have been applied with varying
degrees of success. In high-angle and horizontal
openhole wells, operators use stand-alone or
52
expandable screens, openhole gravel packs and,
in a few cases, frac packs or gravel packing above
fracture-initiation pressure to control sand.6
In the past, cased-hole gravel packing was a
reliable and widely used sand-control method in
conventional vertical wells, but this technique
often results in extremely high completion skins.7
Today, most cased-hole gravel packs are per-
formed as a high-rate water pack (HRWP) or a
frac pack, depending on local experience or
available materials and equipment. In wells with
cemented casing, selective and oriented perfora-
ting attempt to prevent sand production by
avoiding weakly consolidated intervals or
aligning perforations with maximum in-situ
stresses to increase perforation stability.8
Hydraulic fracturing for sand control involves
conventional and tip-screenout (TSO) treatments
performed in formations where a reduction in
pressure drop, or drawdown, can minimize sand
influx or, in some cases, prevent the onset of
sanding.9 Frac packing combines TSO fracture
stimulations that create short, wide hydraulic
fractures with gravel packing to control sand
production from weakly consolidated formations.10
Screenless completions combine selective or
oriented perforating, in-situ consolidation and
frac packing to control sand.11 In some areas and
under certain formation conditions, stand-alone
or expandable screens may be an alternative to
gravel packing or frac packing.12
The initial productivity of wells with stand-
alone screens is usually good, but many of these
screen-only completions fail to adequately
exclude sand over time. Some wells completed
with unpacked screens do not fail completely,
but must be produced at significantly reduced
rates because of partially plugged or eroded
screens. Openhole gravel packs, which provide
better borehole stability, tend to maintain
productivity and control sand longer than stand-
alone or expandable screens.13
Economic considerations often require
operators to choose sand-control methods that
maximize completion reliability over the produc-
tive life of a well or a field without limiting well
productivity. The cost of future interventions to
perform well workovers or recompletions is
another important consideration when selecting
and designing sand-control completions. In
high-cost, high-rate wells, expensive remedial
operations affect overall project profitability
and economics.
Gas contracts, for example, often include
penalty clauses for defaulting on production and
delivery quotas. For cost- and risk-sensitive
completions, especially in deepwater and subsea
developments, high failure rates and the
uncertainty associated with stand-alone and
expandable screens may justify the choice of gravel
packing. However, if additional data become
available to support expandable sand screen
(ESS) reliability, operators might choose to use
ESS systems more frequently.
Today, more companies view OHGP
completions as a viable sand-control completion
for inclined wellbores, especially in high-rate
wells and wells with long horizontal sections.
Because of a proven record of installation
reliability, many operators consider openhole
gravel packing as the base case for sand control
in subsea, deepwater, or large-diameter wellbores
and ultrahigh-rate gas wells.
Water Packing in Nigeria
In 2002, Shell Petroleum Development Company
(SPDC) evaluated openhole gravel packing as a
sand-control option in the Niger Delta, Nigeria
(next page).14 Previously, SPDC had drilled
30 wells with horizontal multilateral and
sidetrack sections in shallow unconsolidated
reservoirs. SPDC completed most of these wells
with stand-alone slotted or prepacked screen
liners in open hole.
In addition to the difficulty of cleaning out
horizontal sections before and after installing
completion equipment, stand-alone screens
without gravel packs are prone to partial
plugging, screen erosion, sand influx and loss of
productivity, which led SPDC and other
operators to try expandable screens. These
problems often are related to incorrect fluid
quality and practices during installation. Fluid
cleanliness and conditioning, if managed
properly, can reduce the number of stand-alone
screen failures.
An ESS provides larger inflow area with less
wellbore friction than conventional screen
liners, but current designs do not always
adequately seal against borehole irregularities.
Like conventional stand-alone screens, ESS
systems also are affected by factors related to
fluid quality, possibly even more so because of
potential plugging of small screen openings.
During 2001 and 2002, noncompliant fixed-
cone tools were used to expand most of the ESS
systems. Today, more compliant expansion tools
are available, but they have hole-size limitations.
Expandable screens also tend to cost more,
require longer delivery times and have unproven
long-term productivity and sand-control
effectiveness. However, there have been reports
of ESS completions that have produced sand-free
for more than five years.
Oilfield Review
Niger Delta Exploration and Production Concessions

Niger River Enugu

7
Benin City

1 Area of
4 5 detailed map
4 A F R I C A
38
4 N I G E R I A
3
34
2
4 4 Warri 30 26 15 Owerri
4 4 21 16
46 27
81 Obigbo-North field
3 Uyo
79 26 22 17
3
3
Port Harcourt
36 2
11 13
1 14
Bight of Benin 24
3 2
2 1

7 7
7
71

> Niger Delta, Nigeria, concession map. The Obigbo-North field is located in the OML-11 and OML-17 blocks about 18 km [11.2 miles] northeast of Port
Harcourt, Nigeria. This field was discovered in October 1963. The reservoir consists of unconsolidated sands with permeabilities ranging from 900 to
7,000 mD and porosities of 21 to 33%. The Obigbo-North field comprises 66 reservoir blocks: 55 oil-bearing and 11 gas-bearing. More than 50 wells have
been drilled in the field.

4. Carlson J, Gurley D, King G, Price-Smith C and Walters F:
“Sand Control: Why and How?” Oilfield Review 4, no. 4
(October 1992): 41–53.
5. Parlar M, Ali SA, Hoss R, Wagner DJ, King L, Zeiler C and
Thomas R: “New Chemistry and Improved Placement
Practices Enhance Resin Consolidation: Case Histories
from the Gulf of Mexico,” paper SPE 39435, presented at
the SPE Formation Damage Symposium, Lafayette,
Louisiana, USA, February 18–19, 1998.
6. Ali et al, reference 3.
7. Waters F, Singh P, Baker C, van Wulfften P and Parlar M:
“A Novel Technique for Single-Selective Sand Control
Completions Allows Perforating and Gravel Packing of
Two Zones with Zonal Isolation in One Trip: A Case
History from Trinidad,” paper SPE 56668, presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, October 3–6, 1999.
8. Behrmann L, Brook JE, Farrant S, Fayard A,
Venkitaraman A, Brown A, Michel C, Noordermeer A,
Smith P and Underdown D: “Perforating Practices That
Optimize Productivity,” Oilfield Review 12, no. 1
(Spring 2000): 52–74.
Almaguer J, Manrique J, Wickramasuriya S, Habbtar A,
López-de-Cárdenas J, May D, McNally AC and
Sulbarán A: “Orienting Perforations in the Right
Direction,” Oilfield Review 14, no. 1 (Spring 2002): 16–31.
Bersås K, Stenhaug M, Doornbosch F, Langseth B,
Fimreite H and Parrott B: “Perforations on Target,”
Oilfield Review 16, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 28–37.
Cooper SD, Akong S, Krieger K, Twynam AJ, Waters F,
Hurst G and Parlar M: “A Critical Review of Completion
Techniques for High-Rate Gas Wells Offshore Trinidad,”
paper SPE 94662, presented at the SPE European
Formation Damage Conference, Scheveningen,
The Netherlands, May 25–27, 2005.
9. Hydraulic fracturing for reservoir stimulation uses
specialized fluids injected at pressures above the
formation breakdown stress to create 180-degree
opposed cracks, or fracture wings, extending away from
a wellbore. These biwing fractures propagate perpendicular
to the direction of lowest rock stress in a preferred
fracture plane. Held open by a proppant transported in
the treatment fluid, these conductive pathways increase
the effective wellbore radius by establishing linear flow
into the propped fracture and back to the well. Common
proppants are naturally occurring or resin-coated sand
and high-strength bauxite or synthetic ceramics, sized by
screening according to standard US mesh sieves.
In standard fracturing, the fracture tip is the final area to
be packed with proppant. A tip-screenout design causes
proppant to pack, or bridge, near the end of a fracture in
the early stages of the treatment. As additional proppant-
laden fluid is pumped, fractures can no longer propagate
deeper into a formation and begin to widen, or balloon.
This technique creates a wider, more conductive
pathway as proppant packs back toward the wellbore.
10. Saldungaray PM, Troncoso J, Sofyan M, Santoso BT,
Parlar M, Price-Smith C, Hurst G and Bailey W: “Frac-
Packing Openhole Completions: An Industry Milestone,”
paper SPE 73757, presented at the SPE International
Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage
Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, February 20–21, 2002.
Ali S, Norman D, Wagner D, Ayoub J, Desroches J,
Morales H, Price P, Shepherd D, Toffanin E, Troncoso J
and White S: “Combined Stimulation and Sand Control,”
Oilfield Review 14, no. 2 (Summer 2002): 30–47.
Morales RH, Profinet J, Piedras J, Gadiyar B and
Harris S: “Optimization of Frac-Pack Completions Based
on Field Experience,” paper SPE 84263, presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, October 5–8, 2003.
Gadiyar B, Meese C, Stimatz G, Morales H, Piedras J,
Profinet J and Watson G: “Optimizing Frac Packs,”
Oilfield Review 16, no. 3 (Autumn 2004): 18–29.
11. Pitoni E, Devia F, James SG and Heitmann N:
“Screenless Completions: Cost-Effective Sand Control in
the Adriatic Sea,” SPE Drilling & Completion 15, no. 4
(December 2000): 293–297; also paper SPE 58787,
presented at the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana,
February 23–24, 2000.
Acock A, Heitmann N, Hoover S, Malik BZ, Pitoni E,
Riddles C and Solares JR: “Screenless Methods to
Control Sand,” Oilfield Review 15, no. 1
(Spring 2003): 38–53.
12. Richard BM, Montagna JM and Penberthy WL Jr :
“Horizontal Completions—2 Stand-Alone Screens Vary
in Effectiveness,” Oil & Gas Journal 95, no. 32
(August 11, 1997): 63–69.
Delattre E, Authier JF, Rodot F, Petit G and Alfenore J:
“Review of Sand Control Results and Performance on a
Deep Water Development—A Case Study from the
Girassol Field, Angola,” paper SPE 91031, presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, September 26–29, 2004.
Al-Lamki A, Twycross J and Clarke G: “Maximizing
Productivity in the Scoter Gas Condensate Field, UKCS:
A Multidisciplinary Approach to Expandable Sand Screen
Design and Subsea Installation,” paper SPE 91004,
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Houston, September 26–29, 2004.
13. Ali et al, reference 3.
Wilson A, Roy A, Twynam A, Shirmboh DN and Sinclair G:
“Design, Installation and Results from the World’s
Longest Deep-Water Openhole Shunt-Tube Gravel-Pack
West of Shetlands,” paper SPE 86458, presented at the
SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana,
February 18–20, 2004.
14. Onwusiri H, Onwuzurike C, McPike T and Jansen R:
“Horizontal Openhole Gravel Packing in a Depleted and
Heterogeneous Reservoir,” paper SPE 84159, presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, October 5–8, 2003.

Spring 2005 53
 Casing Borehole wall
Slurry Beta wave Screens
Heel

10 9 8 7 6

Toe

1 2 3 4 5

Wash pipe Blank pipe Gravel dune Alpha wave Open hole Filtercake

Typical Surface Treating-Pressure Response for Water Packing

Wash pipe
Screen Gravel
Surface treating pressure, psi

Preflush stage

Alpha wave: slurry transport Annular

along the screens packoff

Slurry stage

Slurry at toe of well Beta wave: gravel

packing from toe to heel
Displacement stage
Treatment duration, min Borehole wall
> Water packing. Gravel packing with low-viscosity fluids, usually brines, relies on gravel deposition around the
low side of a screen-borehole annulus, while a slurry with low gravel concentration moves in turbulent flow along
the top (top and bottom right). The borehole must be sealed with an efficient filtercake to minimize fluid leakoff. If
circulation—fluid returns to surface—is maintained, gravel moves in an “alpha” wave (1 to 5) toward the far end,
or toe, of a horizontal section. If the slurry dehydrates and forward packing ceases in intervals with high fluid
losses, gravel fills the annulus and forms a bridge, resulting in an incomplete pack beyond that point. If bridging
occurs or after gravel reaches the toe, packing proceeds back toward the beginning, or heel, of a horizontal
section in a “beta” wave (6 to 10). Surface treating pressures provide an indication of how water-packing
treatments are progressing (bottom left).

These disadvantages restrict ESS utilization per gallon [0.06 to 0.24 g/cm3]—of gravel reaching the end of a workstring internal wash
in remote areas and mature fields with limited transported by a low-viscosity carrier fluid, pipe, the toe of a horizontal section, a gravel
incremental production or reserve potential. usually brine (above).16 bridge or collapsed formation.
Gravel packing, on the other hand, has proved The low side of a borehole packs first until A second deposition process, or “beta” wave,
reliable in cased and openhole vertical wells; gravel reaches the far end of a section, also begins packing the annulus topside back toward
recent horizontal OHGP installations have been called the toe, or until gravel forms a bridge the beginning, or heel, of a well. This beta wave
less susceptible to partial screen plugging and because of formation collapse or high fluid requires enough fluid velocity to maintain
sand erosion. An OHGP generally has lower leakoff. Excessive fluid loss is caused by a turbulent flow and move gravel along the top of
completion damage, or skin, sustains combination of inefficient fluids, high formation the screen-borehole annulus.
productivity longer than conventional stand- permeability and poor or damaged filtercake, In this Nigerian well, SPDC was concerned
alone screens, and may sometimes be more cost- and low reservoir pressure, resulting in treat- about the low minimum in-situ stress of
effective than current ESS systems.15 ments that exceed formation breakdown, or 0.56 psi/ft [12.7 kPa/m] calculated from well-log
In the Obigbo-North field, SPDC selected fracture gradient, pressure. Gravitational forces derived values of Poisson’s ratio in the formation.
Well QWSB-53 for an OHGP. This was the first dominate during this “alpha” wave, so gravel SPDC drilled out cement in the bottom joint of
OHGP by SPDC and the first in the Niger Delta. settles out in an advancing dune front until the casing and the float shoe, and 30 ft [9 m] of pay
SPDC and Schlumberger performed a water- particle bed reaches an equilibrium height. to perform a pressure limit test. To ensure an
packing treatment in mid-2002 with the objective When fluid flowing above the bed reaches the adequate pressure margin for packing, engineers
of achieving 3,000 B/D [477 m3/d] of sand-free critical velocity for particle transport, gravel used the fracture gradient of 0.64 psi/ft
oil production. Water packing involves low again moves toward the far end, or toe, of a [14.5 kPa/m] determined from this test as the
concentrations—0.5 to 2 pounds of proppant horizontal section. This alpha wave stops after upper limit for placing gravel.

54 Oilfield Review
 SPDC then drilled a 1,000-ft [305-m] Casing cross section
horizontal section to total depth using a
0.49-psi/ft [11 kPa/m] water-base drilling fluid. Surface-controlled
After reaching total depth, drillers circulated the subsurface safety valve 7-in. liner
borehole clean with no significant fluid loss, 6.184 in.
which indicated that filtercake on the sandface 4.5-in. gravel-pack packer
3.958 in.
provided a good seal. To minimize screen plugging,
2.875-in. tubing
SPDC displaced the open hole with a solids-free 2.441 in.
fluid of the same composition as the reservoir
drilling fluid without calcium carbonate, but with
additional salt to maintain a 0.49-psi/ft pressure 9 5⁄8-in. casing
gradient. The casing was displaced with filtered Openhole cross section
brine before running the sandface completion
assembly, which consisted of available screens
from warehouse stock (right). 7-in. liner
A volumetric calculation determined that 6-in. open hole
FIV Formation
Isolation Valve 4.45-in. screens
9,237 lbm [4,190 kg] of gravel would be
4-in. base pipe
required to pack the 6-in. openhole annulus. 3.548 in.
Schlumberger pumped gravel using a filtered 2.875-in. tubing
12% potassium chloride [KCl] brine carrier fluid. 2.441 in.
Injection pressure and rate, and sand
concentration were monitored at surface to track
the alpha and beta waves (below right). 7-in. liner Gravel End of open hole
Gravel was placed in four stages at different at 9,410 ft MD
concentrations while reducing the injection rate
Heel
to adjust for injection pressure increases. In
formations with low fracture gradients, Shell Toe
Gravel-pack packer 965 ft of wire-wrapped screen
completion engineers often reduce the slurry at 8,273 ft MD
injection rate once a beta wave initiates to avoid > Obigbo-North field wellbore and completion schematic. Shell Petroleum Development Company
prematurely breaking down formations prior to completed Well QWSB-53 with 965 ft [294 m], or 32 joints, of screen deployed in open hole
developing enough dune height to completely without centralizers.
cover the screens. This technique lays down
additional alpha waves on top of previous
dune beds.
This resulted in multiple alpha waves and QWSB-53 OHGP
complete screen coverage. The operator pumped 3,000 6
a total of 13,500 lbm [6,123 kg] of gravel, but Injection pressure
reversed out 2,670 lbm [1,211 kg] of excess 2,500 Sand concentration 5
Injection rate

Sand concentration, lbm/gal

gravel, leaving about 10,830 lbm [4,912 kg] of Beta wave

Injection rate, bbl/min

gravel around the screens, which corresponds to 2,000 4
Pressure, psi

an actual borehole size of 6.25 in.

After gravel packing, the running tool and 1,500 3
wash pipe were retrieved. A 31⁄2-in. tubing string
with a tubing-retrievable subsurface safety valve 1,000 2
and gas-lift mandrels for future artificial lift was Alpha wave
installed. A 10% hydrogen chloride [HCl] acid 500 1
treatment energized with nitrogen [N2] was
displaced in the horizontal section using 11⁄2-in. 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
coiled tubing and a downhole tool with 360°
Time, min
rotating jet nozzles to generate hydraulic
> Obigbo-North field gravel-packing treatment. SPDC and Schlumberger pumped the
turbulence and make closer contact with
Well QWSB-53 gravel pack while monitoring injection pressure (red), sand concentration
filtercake on the borehole wall. (blue) and injection rate (green). Gravel-packing operations were performed at 3.5, 3,
2.5 and 1 bbl/min [0.56, 0.48, 0.4 and 0.16 m3/min]. The pumping profile showed pressure
15. Skin is a dimensionless measure of completion damage. responses corresponding to both alpha-wave and beta-wave gravel deposition. About
Positive values represent damage. Zero is equivalent to 75% of the gravel was deposited during the alpha wave, leaving only 25% for the beta-
the productivity of an undamaged formation. Negative
values represent stimulated producing conditions. wave deposition.
16. Parlar and Albino, reference 1.

Spring 2005 55
 Post-treatment cleanup improved well wells. The water-packing technique was deemed External shunt tubes on Alternate Path
performance by diverting acid across the too complex to execute without proper onsite screens allow slurry to bypass any blockage that
horizontal section and by ensuring deeper technical expertise and supervision. forms in the annulus between screens and casing
penetration.17 The well initially produced oil at Subsequently, SPDC installed several or an open hole during gravel packing. This
3,250 B/D [517 m3/d]. A spinner inflow profile, openhole gravel packs using Alternate Path technology helps ensure a complete gravel pack
pressure drawdown and total production rate shunt-tube screens and Schlumberger MudSOLV below annular bridges.19 However, shunt tubes
from a memory production log indicated 100% filtercake removal service, which were restrict the size of screen that can be deployed,
pack efficiency, with the entire horizontal extremely successful. These high-rate gas-well which is a limitation.
section producing into the screen assembly. completions were not horizontal, but had high- Unlike water packing, this technique does not
This completion demonstrated better initial angle wellbore inclinations over relatively short rely on filtercake integrity. If the annulus
inflow capability and longer sustained intervals of about 100 ft [30 m]. SPDC continues becomes restricted, pumping pressure increases
productivity at a higher drawdown pressures to evaluate Alternate Path screen technology for and slurry diverts into the shunts. These tubes
than other wells with stand-alone screens. It also longer pay intervals. provide a conduit for slurry to bypass collapsed
saved the SPDC Eastern Asset Team US$ 300,000 hole, external inflatable packers or annular
compared with previous ESS installations. Alternate Path Technology gravel bridges at the top of intervals or adjacent
Low-rate water packing was a technical, If gravel packing is required, operators must to zones with high fluid leakoff.
operational and commercial success in the Niger choose between water packing with conventional Gravel packing with Alternate Path screens
Delta. SPDC continued to improve fluid quality screens or using screens with Alternate Path uses gravel pumped at higher concentrations—
and fluid handling, reduce nonproductive rig shunt tubes, two field-proven techniques for 4 to 8 lbm/gal [0.48 to 0.96 g/cm3]—in viscous
time and monitor OHGP performance to completing long openhole sections. Mobil Oil carrier fluids. Engineers adapted Alternate Path
determine whether this technique was suitable Corporation, now ExxonMobil, developed screens for use in longer openhole horizontal
for other wells. Alternate Path technology in the late 1980s and sections. Transport shunts without ports are
Horizontal openhole gravel packing was later early 1990s to address problems associated with attached along the entire length of screen
discontinued because of premature screenouts gravel bridging (below).18 assemblies to reduce friction pressures while
and incomplete gravel packs on some other gravel packing long intervals; shunts with exit
ports, or nozzles, serve as packing tubes.

Casing Slurry Shunt tube Protective shroud Nozzles Borehole wall

Heel
3

Toe
1 2 4 5

Wash pipe Blank pipe Gravel Screen Open hole Filtercake

Typical Surface Treating-Pressure Response for Shunt-Tube Screens Transport tube

Packing tube

Protective shroud
Alpha wave: slurry transport Borehole
Surface treating pressure, psi

along the screens wall

Slurry at toe of well Annular packoff
Preflush stage

Slurry stage Gravel

Pressure increase
as flow diverts
Displacement stage into shunt tube
Gravel forms
Screen
Treatment duration, min Nozzle
Base pipe
> Alternate Path gravel packing. This technology ensures complete packing of gravel around sand-exclusion screen assemblies
and across an entire horizontal section. Shunt tubes attached to the screens provide conduits for slurry to bypass gravel bridges
and fill annular voids (top and bottom right). Shunt packing does not depend on filtercake to prevent fluid loss. If the annulus
between screens and openhole packs off prematurely (1 to 3), slurry diverts into the shunts, and gravel packing proceeds toward
the toe even with no fluid returns, or circulation, to surface (4 and 5). Usually, pump rates are reduced after shunt flow begins,
and treating pressure increases because of the small shunt-tube diameters (bottom left).

56 Oilfield Review
 This configuration reduces carrier-fluid leakoff
into the annulus, limits slurry dehydration, and
delivers slurry to packing tubes at 4 to 6 bbl/min
[0.6 to 0.9 m3/min]. Slurry flows from transport to
packing tubes through a manifold at each screen
joint and exits through wear-resistant, carbide
nozzles to pack voids behind screens at 0.5 to
2 bbl/min [0.08 to 0.3 m3/min]. Shunts and
nozzles are designed to reduce gravel buildup
inside shunts.
Gravel does not easily make turns through
small exit ports, so large angled nozzles that
extend into the flowstream increase the
tendency for slurry to exit the shunts. Treatments
are performed using nondamaging fluids with
good gravel-carrying capacity and low friction
characteristics.
Blank pipe above screen assemblies also can
be fitted with transport tubes to provide a path
for slurry in the event of borehole collapse or
formation of a gravel bridge at the top of an
interval. In addition, a pipe shroud with
predrilled holes surrounds the entire Alternate
Path screen assembly to centralize the screens
within the shroud and to protect the shunt tubes
during installation.
Shunt Packing in Azerbaijan
BP operates the Azeri, Chirag and Guneshli
(ACG) fields in the Caspian Sea (above right).
Since 1997, BP has installed several different
types of sandface completions in 29 primary and
sidetrack wells, including both producers and
injectors. During this period, sand-control
methods evolved from water packing with
conventional screens and cased-and-perforated
completions to stand-alone screens, expandable
sand screen (ESS) systems and openhole gravel
packing with Alternate Path screens.20
Water Packing with Conventional Screens—
BP completed two early Chirag producing wells,
A-02 and A-03, as openhole gravel packs using the
water-packing technique. Well A-02 produced oil
from December 1997 until March 1999 with
associated sand rates of less than 10 lbm/1,000 bbl
[28.5 g/m3] and no water. Since then, BP
periodically shuts this well in because of high gas
production. Buildup tests in December 1998 and
November 2004 indicated positive skins of 3.2 and
2.1, respectively.
Well A-03, a similar completion in January
1998, produced oil with sand rates of 2 to
3 lbm/1,000 bbl [5.7 to 8.6 g/m3]. Buildup tests in
December 1998 and July 2003 both indicated
positive skins of 4.4. Despite relatively low gravel-
pack efficiencies of about 25% and higher skin
factors in each well, water packing with
Spring 2005
KAZAKHSTAN
as Aktau
C
pia
nS ea UZBEKISTAN
AZERBAIJAN
TURKMENISTAN
AZERBAIJAN
Baku ACG fields
Bahar field
Shah Deniz
field
Bulla More
field
0 25 50 miles
0 25 50 75 km
> Azerbaijan, Caspian Sea offshore oil and gas field developments. BP has a 34% interest in Chirag
field, part of the Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli (ACG) megastructure development. The ACG megastructure
contains an estimated 10 billion barrels [1.6 billion m3] of oil in place, in an area that is about 30 miles
[48 km] by 3 to 5 miles [4.8 to 8 km]. Chirag field early oil production was the first phase of ACG
development, along with part of the Central and West Azeri field.
conventional screens achieved acceptable sand 1998, the A-06 completion initially produced sand
control. To date, neither the A-02 nor the A-03 at high rates that eventually stabilized at 1 to
well has produced water, and no sand has 3 lbm/1,000 bbl [2.9 to 8.6 g/m3], but with
accumulated in either wellbore. However, as BP occasional bursts that exceeded 100 lbm/1,000 bbl
began drilling more extended-reach wells with [285 g/m3]. A pressure buildup test indicated a
high-angle and horizontal sections through pay low skin of negative 0.9.
intervals, completion engineers shifted to However, after water breakthrough in early
Alternate Path screens. 2000, sand production increased dramatically,
Cased-and-Perforated Wells—Well A-06 and and BP had to restrict outflow from this well. In
Sidetrack A-06z represent two of nine oil November 2000, a coiled tubing workover
producers and two water injectors in the Chirag cleaned out sand fill and set a cement plug in the
field with cased-and-perforated completions. In wellbore to isolate lower sands and reestablish
17. Arangath R, Onwusiri HN and Ogoke VC: “A Cost- Jones LG, Tibbles RJ, Myers L, Bryant D, Hardin J and
Effective Approach to Improve Performance of Horizontal Hurst G: “Gravel Packing Horizontal Wellbores with
Wells Drilled in High-Permeability Formations,” paper Leak-Off Using Shunts,” paper SPE 38640, presented at
SPE 73786, presented at the SPE International the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, San Antonio, Texas, October 5–8, 1997.
Lafayette, Louisiana, February 20–21, 2002. Karlstad S, Sherlock-Willis T, Rajan S, Samsonsen B and
Onwusiri H, Onwuzurike C, Adiodun A and Uchendu C: Monstad PA: “An Evaluation and Design Approach to
“Rotating Jetting Nozzle Adds Value in the Cleanup of Gravel-Pack Treatments in the Gullfaks Field,” paper
Horizontally Gravel Packed Well—Case Histories from SPE 48978, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Sandstone Environment,” paper SPE 82237, presented at Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
the SPE European Formation Damage Conference, September 27–30, 1998.
The Hague, May 13–14, 2003. 20. Powers B, Elliott F, Gilchrist J, Twynam AJ, Edment B
18. Shunt-screen technology was developed by Mobil, now and Parlar M: “A Critical Review of Chirag Field
ExxonMobil, in the late 1980s and early 1990s and is Completions Performance Offshore Azerbaijan,” paper
licensed to Schlumberger. SPE 94824, presented at the SPE European Formation
19. Jones LG, Yeh CS, Yates TJ, Bryant DW, Doolittle MW Damage Conference, Scheveningen, The Netherlands,
and Healy JC: “Alternate Path Gravel Packing,” paper May 25–27, 2005.
SPE 22796, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, October 6–9, 1991.
57
water-free production from the upper sands.
Water breakthrough in these zones during
November 2001 again caused sand production
to increase.
Early in 2002, BP abandoned the A-06
wellbore and sidetracked it to quickly restore
production. Pressure buildup tests in the new
cased-and-perforated A-06z wellbore indicated a
low skin of negative 1.6, but high sand rates
required BP to choke back production after this
well also began producing water in March 2003.
In December 2003, Well A-06z was abandoned
and sidetracked again as an OHGP completion,
which has since produced oil with low sand rates
of 1 to 3 lbm/1,000 bbl.
Stand-Alone Screens—Three Chirag field
wells, including A-09 and A-18, were completed
with stand-alone screens. In April 2002, a
pressure buildup test on Well A-09 indicated a
low skin of negative 2.8. This well produced oil
and minimal sand until water breakthrough in
September 2003 when sand rates became
excessive even at low water cuts of 3 to 6%.
Well A-18, completed with stand-alone
screens, initially had to be choked back because
of excessive sand. After BP gradually increased
the production rate over three months with
corresponding increases in sand, produced sand
began to decrease despite increasing oil rates.
Pressure buildup tests indicated an initial skin of
negative 1.8, which gradually decreased to an
extremely low negative 5. Sand influx continued
to decrease, except for intermittent bursts, but
this well never achieved maximum productivity
because of persistent sanding.
Expandable Sand Screens—BP completed
two Chirag field wells with ESS systems. One, the
A-08z sidetrack, was drilled as a water injector.
But during the cleanup flow period in December
2002, this well produced oil with no water.
Pressure buildup tests indicated a positive skin
of 3.3. The well produced at low sand rates of 1 to
5 lbm/1,000 bbl [2.9 to 14.3 g/m3] until March
2004 when it was converted to injection.
BP installed the second ESS completion in a
sidetrack of Well A-09. The original wellbore,
A-09, had been completed with stand-alone
screens. It produced high oil rates until water
production increased in September 2003 from
less than 0.1% to 10% with significant volumes of
sand. BP sidetracked this well as A-09z and
recompleted the new wellbore with expandable
screens in April 2004. Well A-09z produced oil
with no water and had sand rates similar to Well
A-08. However, skin gradually increased from
negative 1.5 to positive 0.3, possibly because of
increasing gas production.
58
QUANTUM gravel-pack
packer at 6,875 m MD
504 m of AllPAC screens
9 5⁄8-in. casing at 6,969 m MD
Transport tube
93
Packing tube
> Chirag field wellbore and completion schematic. BP completed Well A-19 by running and gravel
packing 504 m [1,653 ft] of AllPAC screens with two packing shunts, two transport shunts and a
protective shroud in open hole.
BP completed both A-08z and A-09z
sidetracks with relatively low-strength ESS
screens. Well logs and absence of initial or
subsequent bursts of sand common in both
cased-and-perforated and stand-alone screen
completions helped confirm a high degree of ESS
integrity. After a period of production, however,
caliper logs revealed screen deformation,
particularly across shale sections. Sand control
and well productivity have not been affected, but
long-term ESS performance is still uncertain.
Alternate Path Screens—Since November
2000, BP has installed 13 Alternate Path
completions in five producers and three water
injectors in the Chirag field and in five producers
of the Azeri field. BP originally planned to
convert Well A-15-T1, the first Chirag field well to
be completed with Alternate Path AllPAC
screens, to water injection after a brief
production period. The sandface completion
included 380 m [1,247 ft] of AllPAC screens with
two transport shunts, two packing shunts and a
protective shroud.
Oil-bearing layer
84-degree wellbore inclination End of open hole at
7,481 m MD
Nozzles Screens Shroud
Slurry diverted into the shunts midway
through the gravel-packing treatment for this
well. BP estimated a pack efficiency of 94% based
on mass-balance calculations. A well log revealed
only minor voids in a few locations. Buildup tests
in July 2001 indicated a positive skin of 3.2. One
year later, skin had decreased to positive 1.8. A
production log revealed uniform inflow across
the openhole section.
BP kept Well A-15-T1 as a producer, and in
December 2000, this OHGP well produced oil at
15,400 B/D [2,448 m3/d] with no water. The well
began producing water in January 2003. Water
cut increased to about 7% at the end of 2003, and
then to 14% by mid-2004. Sand rates, however,
remained at 0.3 to 5 lbm/1,000 bbl [0.86 to
14.3 g/m3] in contrast to significantly greater
sand production from wells having stand-alone
screens and cased-and-perforated completions
with water cuts as low as 3 to 5%.
Flow from the well recently ceased because of
liquid loading, but the OHGP maintained adequate
sand control during two years of water production.
This performance established openhole gravel
packing with Alternate Path screens as the design
basis for subsequent well completions.
Oilfield Review
 Well A-19, the longest extended-reach well to
date in the Chirag field, was drilled and
completed in December 2004 to tap an
undeveloped area of the field, 6 km [3.7 miles]
northwest of the Chirag-1 platform. The sandface
completion included 504 m [1,653 ft] of AllPAC
screens with two packing shunts, two transport
shunts and a protective shroud (previous page).
BP calculated a gravel-pack efficiency of 91%
in the A-19 well. Pressure data indicated that
slurry diverted into the shunts during gravel
packing (right).
Pressure buildup tests in January and
February 2005 indicated near-zero positive skins
of 0.5 and 0.1, respectively. The well produced oil
rates that exceeded the 20,000-B/D [3,180-m3/d]
test-separator capacity. Sand influx averaged less
than 1 lbm/1,000 bbl [3 g/m3] with no produced
water. BP expects the output of Well A-19 to
reach 29,500 B/D [4,690 m3/d], the highest rate
in this field. This is a significant achievement
after eight years of production, with reservoir
pressure depleted 1,000 psi [6.89 MPa] below
initial conditions.
Four other wells were completed using
similar procedures, two in the Chirag field and
two in the Azeri field. Both Chirag wells had
positive skins of 2. Well A-12x produced oil at
9,000 to 12,000 B/D [1,431 to 1,908 m3/d] and had
a sand rate of 0.4 to 1 lbm/1,000 bbl [1.2 to 3
g/m3]. Well A-06y produced oil at 14,000 to 15,000
B/D [2,226 to 2,385 m3/d] and had a sand rate of
1 to 2 lbm/1,000 bbl [3 to 6 g/m3].
One of the two Azeri field completions, Well
B-05, produced oil at 42,000 B/D [6,677 m3/d]
with extremely low sand rates of 0.2 to
0.3 lbm/1,000 bbl [0.6 to 0.9 g/m3]. The second
Azeri well, B-09, produced oil at 35,000 B/D
[5,565 m3/d] and had similar low sand rates, but
is still choked back. This level of productivity is
notable because a borehole problem prevented
screens from reaching total depth, so only one
zone contributes to production.
These completions resulted in high-
productivity wells. Installation of sandface
equipment was successful in all the wells except
one, Azeri B-09, where the screens got stuck
midway down the openhole section. This problem
has occurred in other areas, when screens were
run after displacing oil-base mud with water-
base fluids.21 Difficulties running screens to total
depth in water-base fluids motivated BP to
modify completion procedures in the next two
Azeri wells.
The Azeri Well C-04, completed in December
2004, was the first completion in the ACG
development to have sandface equipment run
Spring 2005
A-19 OHGP
6,000
5,000
Surface pressure, psi
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0 0
14:16:08 14:32:48
> Chirag field Well A-19 gravel-packing treatment. BP and Schlumberger pumped the record-setting
Well A-19 gravel pack at 6 lbm/1,000 gal [17 g/m3] and about 10 bbl/min [1.6 m3/min] while monitoring
injection pressure (red), fluid injection rate in (blue), fluid return rate out (yellow) and sand concentration
(green). The pressure profile during pumping operations indicated responses corresponding to both
annular gravel deposition and shunt-tube diversion.
with oil-base fluids in the wellbore. The
completion equipment included 600 m [1,969 ft]
of AllPAC screens with two transport shunts, two
packing shunts and a protective shroud.
Estimated gravel-pack efficiency was 66%. A
buildup test indicated zero total skin.
Well C-01Az, a similar completion, had a
positive skin of 2.5. A higher estimated gravel-
pack efficiency of 93% resulted from increased
drilling-fluid density and corresponding
reduction in inward movement of the hole before
gravel packing. A large-scale surface test
identified no significant problems with
displacing oil-base fluids from screens, so BP
plans to use these modified techniques on future
openhole gravel packs.
Fluids and displacement procedures used in
this development program have evolved since the
first Alternate Path completion in November
2000. Initially, BP drilled cased-and-perforated
wells and completions with stand-alone screens
using oil-base fluids. Early wells with openhole
gravel packs were drilled using water-base fluids
that were essentially reduced viscosity, or
thinned, mud from previously drilled hole
sections. The wells also were gravel packed with
water-base fluids.
BP anticipated that wells would become more
challenging and that high-angle and longer
extended-reach wellbores would be difficult to
drill and complete using water-base fluids. BP,
ChevronTexaco, Petrobras and Total initiated a
joint venture to develop oil-base fluids for drilling
and completing OHGP wells.22
Injection pressure
Injection rate in 12
Fluid return rate Final annular
Sand concentration packoff 11
10
9
Sand concentration, lbm/gal
Injection rate, bbl/min
8
7
6
6-ppa
5
concentration Shunt flow
4
3
2
1
14:49:28 15:06:08 15:22:48 15:39:28 15:56:08 16:12:48 16:29:28
Time, hr : min : sec
Reservoir sections of the first two wells
completed with Alternate Path screens in the
Chirag field and one well in the Azeri field were
drilled with water-base fluids. A synthetic oil-
base mud was used for reservoir drilling in the
next three Chirag field producers and the next
four Azeri field producers.
In the three Chirag field wells and the first
two Azeri field wells, the entire wellbore was
displaced with water-base fluid before running
sandface completion equipment. On the two
most recent Azeri wells, screens were run in oil-
base mud.
To date, BP has gained significant experience
that can be applied in other wells in the Chirag
and Azeri fields and the deepwater Guneshli
field. Fluid systems currently available provide
BP with the option of implementing oil-base
gravel packing if necessary.
21. Brady ME, Bradbury AJ, Sehgal G, Brand F, Ali SA,
Bennett CL, Gilchrist JM, Troncoso J, Price-Smith C,
Foxenberg WE and Parlar M: “Filtercake Cleanup in
Open-Hole Gravel-Packed Completions: A Necessity or
A Myth?” paper SPE 63232, presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
October 1–4, 2000.
Parlar M, Twynam AJ, Newberry P, Bennett C,
Elliott F, Powers B, Hall K, Svoboda C, Rezende J,
Rodet V and Edment B: “Gravel Packing Wells Drilled
with Oil-Based Fluids: A Critical Review of Current
Practices and Recommendations for Future
Applications,” paper SPE 89815, presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
September 26–29, 2004.
22. Wagner M, Webb T, Maharaj M, Twynam A, Green T,
Salamat G and Parlar M: “Open-Hole Horizontal Drilling
and Gravel-Packing with Oil-Based Fluids—An Industry
Milestone,” paper SPE 87648, presented at the
SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana,
February 18–20, 2004.
59
Looking Ahead
Many recently discovered fields require sand
management.23 For example, BP estimates that
within five years 50% of its oil and gas production
will be from weak and unconsolidated sandstone
reservoirs. In the Niger Delta region of Nigeria
where Shell Production Development Company
operates, 70% of hydrocarbon reserves lie in
shallow reservoirs prone to producing sand.
Selection of suitable sand-prevention
techniques is a challenge that requires a
substantial amount of data, acquired at
significant cost. Even then, sand-control
measures that appear viable based on initial data
often fail. This makes experience in a particular
area an important factor in planning and design
of future well completions.
Based on experience, cased-and-perforated
completions yield low skins, but produce large
volumes of sand, even before water
breakthrough. These completions require
restricted production rates and longer flow
periods to achieve postcompletion cleanup. They
also involve repeated cleanout of surface
separators, and the transport and proper
disposal of sand at surface with associated
health, safety and environmental risks. Sand fill
in wells requires frequent remedial well
interventions, and flow from these wells
eventually must be choked back significantly.
Completions with stand-alone screens exhibit
low skins, but often produce large volumes of
sand initially. Subsequently, sand influx rates
decrease, but there still can be occasional bursts
of higher sand production. However, both cased-
and-perforated and screen-only completions
produce large amounts of sand as water
production increases, even at low water cuts,
necessitating expensive premature sidetracks in
some fields.
ESS completions have low skins and currently
appear to provide sand control equivalent to an
OHGP, but the long-term impact of screen
deformation, and ESS performance and
reliability after water breakthrough remain
unknown. Many initial ESS completions have
been converted to injection after short periods of
production; others were installed too recently for
conclusive evaluation.
23. Acock A, ORourke T, Shirmboh D, Alexander J,
Andersen G, Kaneko T, Venkitaraman A,
López-de-Cárdenas J, Nishi M, Numasawa M,
Yoshioka K, Roy A, Wilson A and Twynam A: “Practical
Approaches to Sand Management,” Oilfield Review 16,
no. 1 (Spring 2004): 10–27.
24. Kefi S, Lee J, Pope TL, Sullivan P, Nelson E,
Hernandez AN, Olsen T, Parlar M, Powers B, Roy A,
Wilson A and Twynam A: “Expanding Applications for
Viscoelastic Surfactants,” Oilfield Review 16, no. 4
(Winter 2004/2005): 10–23.
60
Chirag Field Completion Skins
11
Openhole gravel pack
10
9 Cased and perforated
8 Stand-alone screen
Expandable sand screen
Dimensionless completion skin
7
6 A-16
A-03
5
4
3
A-08Z A-06Y
2
A-02 A-15
1 A-12X
A-09Z
0 A-01 A-19
-1 A-06Z
-2 A-08
A-10
-3
A-07
-4 A-11
A-05 A-18
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Wellbore inclination (bedding plane normal), degrees
> Completion skin data for the Chirag field. Cased-and-perforated completions
in the Chirag field yielded low skins. Stand-alone screens also exhibit low
skins. However, both types of completions produce excessive sand as water
production increases. ESS completions have low skins and control sand
production, but their performance after water breakthrough is currently
unproven. BP has reduced openhole gravel-pack completion skins to almost
zero by continuously improving fluid designs and practices. Openhole gravel
packing is a proven completion technique that controls sand even after wells
begin producing water. For these reasons, openhole gravel packing is currently
the basis of design in Azeri, Chirag and Guneshli field well completions.
An OHGP with high pack efficiencies controls For example, improved BP completions
sand, even when intentionally designed with practices in the Chirag field have resulted in a
larger gravel to allow limited volumes of smaller continuous reduction in completion skins to near
fines to be produced. In addition, openhole gravel zero, with incremental oil productivity benefits
packs tend to control sand more effectively than of 600 to 800 B/D [95.4 to 127 m3/d] per well
other methods after water breakthrough. (above). Switching to oil-base drilling fluids
Unless formations have extremely clean, well- increased drilling efficiency, improved hole
sorted grains, subsea production and injection conditions, and reduced drag when running
wells that may produce sand and most screen assemblies in high-angle and horizontal
completions in deep water—greater than 1,000 wells. In addition to environmental benefits due
to 2,000 ft [305 to 610 m]—should be gravel to eliminating discharge of water-base fluids, BP
packed to avoid costly remedial interventions, also realized savings exceeding US$ 130,000 per
especially when large reserve volumes are well by recycling synthetic oil-base fluids and
involved. Many operators now prefer openhole reducing gravel-packing fluid costs through
gravel packing in wells with long horizontal elimination of enzymes in the carrier fluid.
sections to reduce sand-related failures and Openhole gravel packing has evolved as
minimize associated productivity decline. operators and service companies have gained
Ongoing improvements in fluid designs and experience and a better understanding of
displacement procedures are helping operators formation damage and gravel placement in
increase the productivity of openhole gravel- horizontal wells. It remains the sand-control
pack completions, while reducing overall field method of choice to protect screens and provide
development and operational costs. These improved sandface completions.
improvements include reservoir drilling using Successes like those achieved by Shell in
oil-base fluids, running completion equipment Nigeria and BP in Baku have established
and screens in oil-base fluids, displacing the operator confidence in the effective application
entire wellbore with water-base fluids and and long-term performance of openhole gravel
gravel packing with water-base viscoelastic packs. The reliability of OHGP completions is
surfactant fluids.24 contributing to a shift in the well-construction
and sand-control philosophies of many drilling
and completions teams. —MET
Oilfield Review