Well Servicing in Oilfield

DSc Dževad Hadžihafizović (DEng)

Sarajevo 2024
14 WELL SERVICING 1
14.1 SUMMARY 1
14.2 INTRODUCTION 1
14.3 DEFINITIONS 3
14.4 WELL SERVICING METHOD APPLICATIONS 4
14.4.1 Electric Wireline Applications 4
14.4.2 Slickline Applications 6
14.4.3 Coiled Tubing Applications 9
14.4.4 Snubbing Applications 13
14.4.5 Light Rig Applications 15
14.5 COMPLETION SERVICING PHILOSOPHY/STRATEGY 18
14.5.1 Example Well Servicing Decision Chart 19
14.6 WELL VALUATION ASSURANCE SYSTEM-WELL INTERVENTIONS 22
14.6.1 Scope 22
14.6.2 Aspiration 22
14.6.3 Components 22
14.6.3.1 Plan 22
14.6.3.2 Perform 22
14.6.3.3 Measure 22
14.6.3.4 Improve 22
14.7 WELL INTERVENTION OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 23
14.7.1 Preparation 23
14.7.2 Pressure Control 23
14.7.3 Well Operations 24
14.7.4 Specific Coiled Tubing Operations 24
14.8 WATER-OIL RATIO/GAS-OIL RATIO CONTROL 26
14.8.1 The Source Of The Problem 26
14.8.2 General Completion Considerations 30
14.8.2.1 Effect Of Perforation Strategy On Future Water Control Interventions 31
14.8.3 Planning For Water Or Gas Control Intervention 32
14.8.4 Problem Identification 32
14.8.4.1 Diagnosic Techniques 33
14.8.4.2 Diagnostic Plots 34
14.8.4.3 Estimating The Benefit Of The Intervention 34
14.8.5 Treatment Options 35
14.8.5.1 Remedial Cementations 35
14.8.5.2 Tubing Patches 36
14.8.5.3 Packers And Plugs 37
14.8.5.4 Chemical Gel Systems 37
14.8.5.5 Monomer Gel Systems 37
14.8.5.6 Polymers And Polymer Based Gel 37
14.8.5.7 Treatment Application 39
14.8.5.8 Achieving Zonal Isolation 39
14.8.5.9 Recovery From Failed Treatments 40
14.8.5.10 Post Treatment Production Restrictions 40
14.8.6 Dual Completions And Complex Wells 40
14.8.7 Bullhead Treatments 40
14.9 REFERENCES 42
14 WELL SERVICING

14.1 Summary
This section details the various methods used to service completions and their applications and the
impact these have on the completion design. To overcome differences in terminology between the
assets in various regions definitions for the terminology used in this section is also included.
Following the descriptions of the well servicing methods and their applications, their impact on
completion design is addressed and how then a field well servicing philosophy/strategy is developed
for a particular well type. The strategy gives example charts listing completion features which are
affected by completion installation and future well servicing requirements.
The use of the Well Value Assurance System is also highlighted as an aid to adequately plan,
execute and report well interventions and how to document the lessons learnt.
Also included are generic operating and well control procedures for well intervention operations
extracted from BP’s ‘Drilling and Well Operations Policies’ BPA-D-001 document.

14.2 Introduction
Prior to reading this section, it is first necessary to understand the completion hardware used in
completions to facilitate or aid in well servicing operations. Example completion designs showing
the hardware is given in section 9.

Note: For the purposes of this manual, a ‘workover’ is defined as any work performed
that requires the killing of the well (with placement of a hydrostatic barrier in
the wellbore) and removal of the Xmas tree and tubing strings(s). Other live
well servicing techniques required to routinely maintain the well, improve
performance, repair lost productivity are termed ‘well interventions’. These and
other well servicing terms are defined in section 14.3.

During the conceptual design stage an SoR for the completion will have been established. It is
important to identify any potential reasons for well servicing and the applicable techniques at this
stage, as these will have a direct impact on both the life and the architecture of the completion.
When reviewing the impact of well problems and well servicing techniques on the initial
completion design, it is important to recognise the risk associated with each problem and the
potential consequences. It is unlikely that a major change in completion philosophy is warranted if
the risk of a particular problem occurring is very low, unless of course the consequences associated
with the risk are particularly serious. Optimising the completion design around potential well
problems and workover techniques is, like many other issues, a question of balancing risk against
likely consequence.
A significant factor in developing a well servicing and workover philosophy is the well location,
accessibility and cost. For instance a land well in an easy accessible location can be easily serviced
by both live well intervention and workover methods. Alternatively, where wells are relatively
inaccessible such as in mountain locations or offshore where space and allowable weight are at a
premium, the ability to service these may be more difficult and more costly. In these cases a more
complex completion design designed for life of the well, which may include permanent downhole
gauges, smart tools for zonal production control, could be more practicable and economical.

Page 1
In marginal and often well intensive fields, the frequency and type of well servicing technique can
have a significant influence on the field’s viability. The likely well servicing techniques should be
identified at an early stage in the overall project design and their impact on the well area design
fully evaluated.
On offshore platforms after consideration of the following issues, the well bay, BOP area and
derrick can be designed and located to provide safe and efficient well servicing operations:
 The type of operations to be performed.
 The equipment required.
 The location and configuration of the well servicing unit or workover rig.
 The maximum length of lubricator/riser associated with any well intervention operation.
 The impact of simultaneous drilling, production and well servicing operations.

On offshore subsea wells an important aspect is the subsea architecture to enable safe and efficient
re-entry of the wells. Consideration should be given to:
 The type of operations to be performed and the type of unit required, i.e. semi-
submersible drilling/workover unit or modern monohull well servicing unit.
 The equipment required and rig limitations.
 The location and configuration of the well servicing unit anchor patterns with regard to
subsea pipelines and other nearby wellheads.
 Well protection cage removal.
 The impact of simultaneous drilling, production and well servicing operations.
 Potential for dropped objects and the impact on surrounding hardware integrity.

The main aims of this section are to:

 Highlight the potential well problems and reasons for well interventions and workovers.
 Discuss the various techniques available, their application and limitations.
 Illustrate how the selected well servicing strategy impacts the completion design.

Well servicing operations are performed for a number of reasons and not always as a result of
problems occurring in the well. In some instances a number of well servicing operations may be
programmed into a well’s life, although a cost/benefit analysis should be performed to justify this,
especially in remote locations where the workover costs are high.
An example of a pre-planned workover would include wells where there is economic benefit in
completing the well with a larger tubing size to gain the benefit of increased early production.
Although a smaller tubing size would extend the completion life, possibly eliminating the need for a
workover, the restriction in early production could make this less attractive.
The change of well’s duty from a producer to an injector as the field depletes is another example of
a common pre-planned workover.

Page 2
14.3 Definitions
The following table lists the terms used and defines their meaning:
Upper Completion: The part of the completion above the production
packer.
Lower Completion: The part of the completion below the production
packer.
Well Intervention: Any well servicing which requires operations in the
wellbore.
Workover: Any work performed that requires the killing of the
well (with placement of a hydrostatic barrier in the
wellbore) and removal of the Xmas tree and tubing
strings(s).
Live Well Intervention: Any operation in the wellbore through the Xmas tree
on a live well (or potentially live well) requiring
pressure control equipment.
Snubbing: Live well intervention rig operations using jointed
pipe (although the original meaning of the term was
for the insertion of pipe into a well under pressure).
Hydraulic Workover Unit (HWO): Is a specialised hydraulic driven unit designed to
conduct either snubbing operations or workover
operations (these units with light drilling capability
are also sometimes termed light rigs).
Outside Casing Operations: Any servicing which is below the production casing
shoe or through a window cut in the casing
Conventional Coiled Tubing: Coil Tubing for conventional CT operations.
Large Bore Coiled Tubing: Coil Tubing for heavy-duty operations such as CT
drilling which requires a deployment system such as
a tower.
Light Drilling Rig: A portable rig with pulling and rotating capability
sufficient to conduct drilling operations outside the
casing and pulling tubing, i.e. workover rig, HWO
unit, etc.
Drilling Rig: Conventional drilling unit.
Workover Rig: Another term for a light drilling unit.
Hoist: A portable unit which has pulling capabilities but
has no, or very limited, rotating capability.

Page 3
14.4 Well Servicing Method Applications
A completion engineer must have a basic knowledge of the various well servicing methods and their
applications so that he can optimise the completion design in respect to those methods applicable to
the particular well location, well concept and local availability.
A web site for well interventions has been set up which details various well servicing operations
that can be conducted with well intervention techniques. This web site also provides descriptions
and histories of these techniques, the web site is at:
Well Performance and Interventions website

14.4.1 Electric Wireline Applications

Electric wireline can be run in wells with deviation generally less than 70o and sometimes above
this limit using specialised tooling. This service is invaluable in obtaining reservoir data to enable
production to be optimised. It also has applications in fault finding such as identifying leaks,
checking tubular wear, etc. The key with electric wireline is obtaining excellent depth control.
A description of the electric line method is given in:
Well Performance and Interventions website - Electric Line
The deviation limit stated above is the limit when gravity is the means of conveying the toolstring.
Computer programs such as Cerberus can model the ability to access any well but especially for
highly deviated wells. Accessing higher angles sections is now possible using tooling such as
‘Roller Bogies’ and horizontal sections can be accessed using recently developed ‘Tractors’.
Although more complex than the conventional method the use of tractors is becoming more
widespread.
Electric line services are also available for high angle or horizontal wells using coiled tubing to
convey the toolstring. The electric line is threaded through the coil by pumping. This service is
commonly termed ‘stiff wireline’ and is often very useful when pumping operations are also
required.
The following table lists the completion and intervention services provided by electric line:
 Packer setting usually gravel pack sump packers or production packers.
 Production logging (PLT) to obtain reservoir interval data.
 Zonal plugging with bridge plugs usually to reduce water production or abandon lower
depleted zones.
 Leak detection in casing or tubing by the use of sonic or temperature instruments.
 Casing and tubing corrosion monitoring with callipers to ensure tubular integrity.
 Perforating to increase producing interval.
 Re-perforating to bypass damaged existing perforations.
 Casing and tubing repairing with straddles to restore well integrity.
 Tubing punching to bring on production from additional zones or to enable circulation
via the annulus for well killing.
 Tubing cutting (explosive or chemical) to release tubing from packers and enable
recovery by workover.

Figure 14.1 shows a typical electric line rig-up.

Page 4
 Pack-Off

Grease Head

Tool Catcher

Lubricator Sections

Hydraulic Tool Trap

Quick Union Connection

Blind Rams

BOP System Upper Rams

Lower Rams

Wellhead Adaptor

Figure 14.1 – Typical Electric Line Rig-Up

Page 5
14.4.2 Slickline Applications
Slickline, or ‘Mechanical Wireline’ as it is often termed, is the most common well servicing
method. It is by far the lowest cost well intervention method but like electric line is limited to wells
with deviations less than 70o unless roller bogies or tractors (which are currently under
development) are used.
Slickline is used extensively as it is usually readily available, self contained and easily located on
any well site either on land or offshore. The wireline unit can use either a slickline or braided line or
cable (sometimes termed swab line) to conduct operations. Slickline is used for all normal
operations and braided line is used for heavy duty operations such as running 7” wireline retrievable
sub-surface safety valves and fishing.
Wireline units are available in single drum or double drum configurations. The single drum unit
usually only deploys slickline and the double drum unit has a drum of slickline and a drum of
braided line. Slickline is available in 0.147”, 0.125”, 0.108”, 0.092” and 0.082” diameter sizes and
cable in 3/16” or 7/32” diameter. 0.133” diameter slickline is also currently under development.
Slickline operations in well angles greater than 70o can be carried out using coiled tubing with
modified slickline tooling. Similar to stiff wireline described in the previous section, the use of coil
can have advantages with regard to pulling capacity (useful for fishing) and when needing to clear
off debris to enable latching with downhole devices.
A description of the mechanical wireline method can be found at:
Well Performance and Interventions website - Slickline

The advancement in electronics now gives a wider role for mechanical wireline in logging
operations by using memory logging toolstrings. These record the data which is recovered when the
tools are retrieved back to surface. This method is considerably cheaper than real time logging with
electric line.
Electronics are now also used in some wireline retrievable bridge plug systems where the plug is set
and sometimes retrieved with electric motor driven setting and retrieving tools.
Perforating can also now be carried out using slickline since Safe firing systems have been
developed. These operate downhole only when a series of pre-set triggers, (time, pressure,
temperature, motion) which are dependent on well conditions, are activated, leading to detonation of
the firing head.
The following table lists the well services provided by mechanical wireline method:
 Tubing gauging to check for collapsed tubing or tubing blockages.
 Wireline downhole safety valve installation and retrieval for scheduled maintenance or
failure.
 Well plugging with conventional nipple systems or bridge plugs to enable leak detection
or for providing barriers for Xmas tree removal or repair or abandonment of lower
depleted zones.
 Gas lift valve installation into SPMs to initiate gas lifting or replacement of valve for
scheduled maintenance or for failure.
 Control production from individual zones by opening or closing sliding side doors
(SSDs) or similar devices.
 Swabbing to remove hydrostatic overbalance and induce natural flow or to remove spent
fluid after stimulation to prevent formation damage.

Page 6
  Leak detection by the use of plugs at various depths or running a temperature
instrument.
 Scale/paraffin/wax removal with gauge cutters to reinstate optimum production rates.
 Sand/debris removal by bailing to obtain optimum production or enable wireline access
below bridge off depth.
 Re-perforating (with specially adapted firing systems) to bypass damaged perforations.
 Casing and tubing repairing with straddles to maintain well integrity.
 Tubing punching to bring on production from additional zones or to enable circulation
via the annulus for well killing.
 Conventional pressure and temperature surveys with conventional BHP gauges to obtain
reservoir and flowing data.
 Memory tool production logging (PLT) to obtain reservoir interval data.
 Casing and tubing corrosion monitoring with callipers to ensure tubular integrity.
 Fishing to clear conduits of lost or stuck tools/debris.

Figure 14.2 overleaf shows a typical mechanical wireline rig-up.

Page 7
Figure 14.2 – Typical Mechanical Wireline Rig-Up

Page 8
14.4.3 Coiled Tubing Applications
Coiled tubing has become much more widely used in recent years due to the ever increasing size of
coil available with corresponding higher pump rates which can be achieved. Coil tubing workstrings
are usually up to 2” diameter but sizes of up to 3 1/2” diameter are also available normally used as
siphon or velocity strings.
Its ability to be used in high deviations or horizontal sections also adds to its application especially
with the introduction of stiff wireline (coil with electric line) or to conduct operations with tools at
high angles normally performed using slickline.
Coiled tubing’s limitation is its relatively low pressure rating up to a maximum of 7,500psi and also
its tendency to lock-up, due to helical buckling, when deployed in long horizontal sections.
Software packages such as Cerberus can model the ability to access a well by determining the point
where lock-up will occur. These packages also indicate the pulls required at surface, as well as give
a means of monitoring the fatigue life of the particular CT string in use. In horizontal wells, they
also have the ability of demonstrating what additional force a CT Tractor will provide, when
attached to the CT BHA.
A description and history of the coiled tubing method is given at:
Coiled Tubing

The advancement in coiled tubing drilling has also been dramatic especially in underbalance drilling
where great benefits are gained in the prevention of skin damage. Coiled tubing drilling in the
European area is more generally used for side-tracking depleted or badly damaged reservoirs. It also
has application for drilling multi-laterals.
The following table lists the well services provided by coiled tubing:
 Reservoir stimulation to increase reservoir inflow performance.
 Cement repairs to prevent crossflow of zones or close channels to other weaker
formations.
 Drilling (both overbalanced and underbalanced) to avoid higher drilling unit costs or
allow concurrent drilling operations.
 Milling to enable sidetracking to new location or bypass lower section due to technical
or geological reasons.
 Well killing by circulation to enable well intervention or workover.
 Gas lifting to bring wells onstream by reducing hydrostatic head.
 Well plugging with conventional nipple systems or bridge plugs to reduce water
production through encroachment or provide barriers to enable Xmas tree removal or
abandon lower depleted zones.
 Control production from individual zones by opening or closing sliding side doors
(SSDs) or similar devices.
 Leak detection by the use of plugs at various depths.
 Chemical scale/paraffin/wax/asphaltine removal to reinstate optimum production rates.
 Sand removal to obtain optimum production rates.
 Perforating to increase or open up new producing intervals.
 Casing and tubing repairing with straddles to maintain well integrity.

Page 9
  Memory tool production logging to obtain reservoir interval data with stiff wireline.
 Fishing to clear conduits of lost or stuck tools/debris.

Large bore CT also has applications to be used as velocity or siphon strings in existing completions
suffering from reduced productivity or even as a completion tubing especially for ESP completions
to enable fast deployment and retrievability of the pumps.
Figure 14.3 below shows a typical coiled tubing rig-up and Figure 14.5 a typical large bore rig-up
for drilling, milling and high rate treatments.

Page 10
 Goose Neck

Injector Head

Hydraulic Hose

Stripper/Stuffing
Box
Quad BOP's

Page 11
Lubricator/Riser

Control Cab Coiled Tubing Reel Power Skid

Wellhead Combination BOP's

Figure 14.3 – Typical Coiled Tubing Rig-Up

Wellhead
Figure 14.4 – Typical Large Bore Coiled Tubing Injector Rig-Up

Page 12
14.4.4 Snubbing Applications
Snubbing has had a resurgence in application in recent years as the operating speeds of modern units
and advantages, in terms of availability, mobility and rig up time, outweighs the use of workover or
light rigs. It has widespread use in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea for many tasks previously
carried out with drilling rigs as the many rigs have been removed from the platforms for the
economic reasons.
The most commonly used unit for snubbing today is the HWO unit which can be utilised for both
snubbing or workover operations, therefore increasing the applications and optimising usage for the
service providers. A description of a HWO is given at:
Hydralic Workover
The advantages of using a subbing unit other those already described above is that it is a live well
intervention method and less likely to cause formation damage. It also has applications in horizontal
wells where the use of coiled tubing is reach limited due to helical buckling, since the workstring
size can be selected for any particular hole geometry. The big advantage over CT is its’ ability to put
weight on bit.
Snubbing has also been used successfully for sand screen and gravel packing operations.
The downside of snubbing has been the running speed by using single joints and using hydraulics as
the snubbing power for the jack, however more modern systems are being developed which use
hydraulic motors with a rack and pinion system instead of pistons. This provides greater running
speeds especially useful for ESP installation and workover. This technology is not new but is an
adaption of similar technology used in the coal mining industry
The following table lists the well services provided by the snubbing method:
 Reservoir stimulation to increase reservoir inflow performance.
 Cement repairs to prevent crossflow of zones or close channels to other weaker
formations.
 Drilling (both overbalanced and underbalanced) to avoid higher drilling unit costs or
allow concurrent drilling operations.
 Milling to enable sidetracking to new location or bypass lower section due to technical
or geological reasons.
 Sidetrack drilling to new subsurface location.
 Gas lifting to bring wells onstream by reducing hydrostatic head.
 Well plugging with conventional nipple systems or bridge plugs to reduce water
production through encroachment or provide barriers to enable Xmas tree removal or
abandon lower depleted zones.
 Leak detection by the use of plugs at various depths.
 Chemical scale/paraffin/wax/asphaltine removal to reinstate optimum production rates.
 Sand removal to obtain optimum production rates.
 Perforating to increase or open up new producing intervals.
 Casing and tubing repairing with straddles to maintain well integrity.
 Fishing to clear conduits of lost or stuck tools/debris.

Figure 14.5 below shows a typical snubbing unit.

Page 13
Figure 14.5 – Typical Snubbing Unit On An Offshore Platform

Page 14
14.4.5 Light Rig Applications
Light rigs are used when there is no drilling unit left on location or when concurrent operations are
necessary alongside another unit as they are lower cost, modular built for ease of transporting and
relatively easily installed and integrated with existing site infrastructure. Light rigs often include the
modern HWO units designed for heavy duty work such as running or pulling large tubulars and
conducting milling and drilling operations.
Their application is for workover operations where the well is first killed and made safe by live well
intervention methods and then the Xmas tree removed and replaced by workover BOPs.
Light rigs are used mainly for operations which cannot be conducted by other well intervention
methods:
 New drills.
 Completing.
 Completing recovery for sidetracking or abandonment.
 Re-completing
 Cement repairs to prevent crossflow or close channelling to other weaker formations.
 Fishing to clear out the wellbore from lost or stuck tools or tubulars.
 Side-track drilling to new subsurface location.

Figure 14.6 show a typical offshore light rig and Figure 14.7 a modern HWO unit used for the same
applications.

Page 15
Figure 14.6 – Typical Light Rig (Rockies BU Wamsutter)

Page 16
Figure 14.7 – Typical Heavy Duty HWO Unit On An Offshore Platform

Page 17
14.5 Completion Servicing Philosophy/Strategy
To be able to successfully complete and maintain a wells optimum productivity during its producing
life, it is usually necessary to conduct some well servicing by well intervention or workover
methods detailed in this section.
A good completion design should reduce these planned well servicing operations to an irreducible
minimum, however it is a fact of life that completion failures do occur which require unplanned
remedial well operations. The modern completion tools now available to the completion engineer,
such as permanent downhole gauges and ‘smart or intelligent’ surface operated downhole SSDs and
valves for example, can significantly reduce the number of planned well interventions to obtain
reservoir data or to open, or close off, separate producing zones.
It is essential that completion engineers have a basic knowledge of all of the well servicing methods
available (as given in previous section 14.4) and understand their application to their particular
completion design. Some of these methods are also required to enable the installation of the
completion.
A web site dedicated to the operations which can be carried out by well interventions and a
description of each method can be found at:
Well Performance and Interventions website
The most common methods for conducting live well servicing operations are:
 Pumping (from surface.)
 Electric wireline.
 Slickline.
 Coiled tubing.
 Snubbing with HWO unit.

These live well intervention methods can be used to carry out live well servicing operations such as:
 Wireline retrievable downhole safety valve replacement due to failure or for scheduled
maintenance.
 Temporary tubing retrievable valve failure remedy by insert valve installation.
 Wax/paraffin/scale cutting to reinstate optimum production rates.
 Obtaining reservoir interval data to enable long term well performance prediction and
reservoir management.
 Production control by opening or closing off various zones from the production tubing.
 Re-perforating to bypass damaged perforations and return to optimum production levels.
 Sand removal to unblock tubing or casing.
 Well plugging for Xmas tree removal or making a well safe for concurrent operations or
to abandon lower depleted levels.
 Monitoring well tubular condition to ensure well integrity.
 Leak detection and repair to maintain well integrity.
 Side-tracking to reach new bottomhole locations.
 Fishing to clear out wells to obtain optimum production or to enable the passage of
intervention tools for well servicing.
 Stimulation to reduce formation damage or to increase permeability.
 Gravel packing to prevent sand production.

Page 18
Major well servicing methods which require well killing, Xmas tree removal and retrieval of the
completion string are termed workover operations. The workover could be to repair or maintain
(e.g. ESP failure/tubing leak) the existing completion or to re-complete the well to a different
reservoir interval or completion design (e.g. gas lift installation). These workovers require the use of
a unit with a mast or derrick such as hydraulic workover unit, hoist, workover rig or conventional
drilling unit. Operations requiring rig interventions include:
 Pulling tubing.
 Casing repairs.
 Conducting operations outside of the casing such as side-tracking.
 Major casing cement repairs.
 Gravel packing.

Each business unit should produce a field servicing philosophy/strategy by identifying and detailing
the well servicing requirements and potential failures and the possible method of remedy. Many
well servicing operations can be determined from data obtained on other similar fields. Once the
philosophy has been determined, by weighting the individual potential requirements, a servicing
strategy can be implemented. This strategy will identify the most commonly required service
methods and these can be checked to ensure their availability under contract or call-out terms.
With today’s current technology some wells are designed to eliminate the need for downhole well
servicing, such wells are termed ‘Intervention-less Wells’. Although intervention-less wells are
designed, the design engineer should not be lulled into a false sense of security and assume that no
interventions will be required where in reality this is not the case and contingency for interventions
should be included in the design.
Example well servicing decision charts from such a strategy for a North Sea platform are shown in
Table 14.1 through Table 14.4.
A review of well intervention methods for extended reach wells (ERWs) is given in section 4 of the
ERD Guidelines which is available on the web site at:
ERD Guidelines
The individual applications of each well intervention method is described in the following
subsections.

14.5.1 Example Well Servicing Decision Chart

The charts in this section are only provided as examples for engineers to understand the capabilities
and limitations of the various well servicing methods and their impact on the completion type,
design and well location. These charts are broken down into planned and unplanned well servicing
operations for both live well interventions and workovers.

Page 19
Live Well Interventions - Completion Failures
Intervention Method
Remedial Conventional
Failure Electric Snubbing
Operations Pumping Slickline Coiled
Wireline Unit
Tubing
Sand screen:
Scale dissolving
permeability Yes Yes Yes
treatment
impairment by scale
Yes (limited Yes (limited
Straddle section
length) length)
Place new
Yes (limited Yes (limited
expandable
length) length)
Sand screen: screen/liner
local damage Perforate screens Yes (with
Yes (stiff
for new screen tractor in
wireline)
installation horizontal)
Yes (limited Yes (limited
Install screen
length) length)
Sand screen: Scale dissolving
Yes Yes Yes
plugging by scale treatment
Gas lift valve Pull valve and
Yes Yes No
replacement replace
Tubing leak Insert straddle Yes Yes Yes Yes
Failure of SCSSV Set insert in SCSSV Yes Yes
Wireline operation
failure leaving Fishing operation Yes Yes Yes
blockage in well
Wireline operation
Heavy duty fishing/
failure not retrievable N/A N/A N/A Yes Yes
milling operation
with wireline
Wireline operation Extreme heavy duty
failure not retrievable fishing/milling N/A N/A N/A N/A Yes
with coiled tubing operation
Yes
Waxing/Asphaltenes Clean out tubing by
Yes (depending on Yes Yes
deposition scraping
severity)
BaSO4 scaling on
tubing (particularly Clean out scale Yes Yes
around GLV).
Corrosion/damage to
Set plug in tubing
Xmas tree upper
hanger and replace Yes
master valve requiring
valve.
replacement.
Corrosion/damage to
Set plugs in tubing
Xmas tree lower
and hanger and Yes
master valve requiring
replace valve.
replacement.

Table 14.1 - Live Well Intervention Capabilities

Page 20
Live Well Interventions - Planned Operations
Intervention Method
Remedial Conventional
Failure Electric Snubbing
Operations Pumping Slickline Coiled
Wireline Unit
Tubing
Scale inhibitor
Bullhead Yes Yes Yes
squeeze
Gas lift valve
Install valves Yes
installation
Yes Yes (memory
Gradient survey with Run logging tools in (with roller PLT with Yes
PLT high angles boggies or roller boggies (stiff wireline)
tractors) or tractors)
Internal inspection of Set plugs to enable
Yes Yes
Xmas tree in-situ visual Inspection

Table 14.2 - Planned Well Intervention Capabilities

Workovers - Completion Failures

Workover Method
Remedial
Failure Large Bore Coiled
Operations HWO Unit Light Drilling Rig
Tubing
Sand screen: Yes
Side-track and re-
plugging by fines (needs rig to pull Yes Yes
complete
migration tubing)
Yes
Screen failure causing Side-track in 8.5” hole
(needs rig to pull Yes Yes
side-track (full re-completion)
tubing)
Pull tubing and replace
Mechanical failure of
production Yes Yes
production packer
packer/tubing
Tubing leaks Pull and replace tubing Yes Yes
Replacement of failed
Pull tubing and replace Yes Yes
annular safety valve
Failure of TRSCSSV (if
Pull tubing and replace
insert valve is non- Yes Yes
TRSCSSV
viable)
Yes
Unsuccessful fishing Mill through casing and
(needs rig to pull Yes Yes
operation side-track well
tubing)
Wellhead annular seal
Pull tubing and replace Yes Yes
assembly leak

Table 14.3- Workover Unit Capabilities

Workovers – Planned Operations

Workover Method
Remedial
Failure Large Bore Coiled
Operations HWO Unit Light Drilling Rig
Tubing
Installation of annular Re-complete upper
X Yes Yes
safety valves completion
Yes
Pull tubing, set plugs/
Abandonment of wells (but only in conjunction Yes Yes
cut casing/ conductors
with HWO unit or rig)

Table 14.4 - Planned Workover Unit Capabilities

Page 21
14.6 Well Valuation Assurance System-Well Interventions
The Well Intervention Section in the WVAS is a guide for engineers which leads them through a
step by step process on how to plan, perform, measure and improve well intervention operations.
This tool should be rigorously used by engineers to ensure all the correct stages are followed and it
also references the tools, information and contacts available to assist in the process. The scope,
aspiration and components of the WVAS Well Intervention Section are outlined below. These are
found on the web site at:
Wells Value Assurance System - Well Intervention

14.6.1 Scope
The Interventions module will provide a basic framework for well interventions information and
assessment.

14.6.2 Aspiration
To offer the engineering user a useful list of resources, including people, programs and documents,
to help design an effective intervention and maximize return on the intervention time and cost
investment.

14.6.3 Components
14.6.3.1 Plan
 HSE direction and controls on the intervention
 Well problem identification requirements
 Basic intervention plan

14.6.3.2 Perform
 Well integrity
 Intervention tools
 Well Control
 Stimulations

14.6.3.3 Measure
 Monitoring methods
 Q/C criteria
 End-of-job metrics

14.6.3.4 Improve
 Technology assessment
 Best practices capture
 Failure assessment

Page 22
14.7 Well Intervention Operational Procedures
The following sub-sections are generic procedures for preparation, well control and carrying out of
well intervention operations. These procedures have been extracted from the ‘Drilling and Well
Operations Policies’ BPA-D-001

Drilling and Well Operations Policy

14.7.1 Preparation
Specific requirements for well intervention operations follow. All other sections of this policy
document shall apply where appropriate.
a) Prior to the commencement of any well intervention operations, the location shall be
inspected to ensure that it is safe for personnel and equipment during the planned
operations.
b) Personnel and equipment shall be protected from exposed runs of wireline or coiled
tubing and from any voids created by the removal of deck hatches and floor gratings.
c) All simultaneous operations (e.g. crane/well operations) shall be assessed for risk and
precautions taken as necessary.
d) During the period of well intervention, one person shall be designated ‘responsible’ for
the operation. Clear emergency shutdown procedures shall be in place, with which all
drilling and well operations personnel are familiar.
e) All equipment subject to operational loading (sheaves, units etc) shall be securely
fastened or anchored to withstand the maximum expected forces during the operation of
that equipment.
f) All safety critical load bearing, lifting, hoisting, pressure containing equipment shall be
inspected and managed through established planned preventative maintenance
procedures.
g) Prior to integrity testing any downhole device, the effect of this testing on any
connecting systems shall be considered and protective measures taken as appropriate.

14.7.2 Pressure Control

a) On initial installation all pressure control equipment shall be pressure tested at least to
the maximum anticipated wellhead pressure and to a low-pressure test of 200 to 300psi.
Both tests shall be recorded.
b) If the pressure control rig-up is not broken below an already fully tested riser and upper
BOP, a retest of the riser assembly for 5 minutes, to the maximum anticipated wellhead
pressure, is adequate.
c) The length of pressure control equipment rig-up shall be sufficient to allow the retrieval
of the whole toolstring, including items which may be retrieved from the well, above the
swab valve.
d) All operational pressure control rig-ups shall be risk assessed to confirm their
limitations in respect to the operational activity envisaged, including reference to the
toolstring lengths employed.

Page 23
14.7.3 Well Operations
a) Prior to any swab cap well entry rig-up, or rig-down, the pressure below the swab cap
shall be bled off and the swab cap area isolated by two barriers.
b) All strings should be shut in during wireline rig-ups on production wells fitted with
more than one tubing string. Once rigged up and tested, the other strings may be opened
up until such time as the operations are complete and the equipment required to be
rigged down.
c) Every well entry programme shall indicate the H2S value in ppm likely to be
encountered.
d) A calibrated and tested currently certified pressure relief valve (PRV) of sufficient
capacity, or an alternative safety mechanism, shall be included in the surface hook-up on
the fluid discharge line on any temporary pumping system.
e) A record of every wireline and coiled tubing toolstring (naming items, providing
lengths, ODs, fish neck sizes and any other salient points) shall be made prior to running
in hole. This record shall be available at the wellsite throughout the time the toolstring is
downhole.
f) A wireline plug having no lock telltale device on the running tool shall be pressure
tested from above prior to being integrity tested.
g) Prior to the commencement of any wireline rig-up, the swab valve turns to open and
close shall be physically checked and noted.
h) If any well is held open by a well service local control unit, that unit shall never be left
unattended.
i) Pressures in the tubing and annuli shall be regularly monitored and recorded during all
well operational activities.

14.7.4 Specific Coiled Tubing Operations

Specific requirements for coil tubing operations follow. All other applicable sections of the Drilling
and Well Operations Policy document shall apply to coil tubing operations.
a) All primary pressure-containing connections shall be flanged.
b) The following BOP arrangements are the minimum acceptable for routine operations:
c) Quad BOP or combination BOP with equivalent capacity with pipe rams, slip rams,
shear rams and seal rams, hydraulic pack-off (optional, used for pressure deployment) or
Combi-BOP with combination pipe and slip rams, combination shear and seal rams,
hydraulic pack-off.
d) The coiled tubing BOPs shall be fully function tested on installation and pressure tested
at least once every seven days, after any BOP changes or after a coil changeout. Tests
shall be recorded.
e) On any perforated well where a coiled tubing bottomhole assembly shall be worked on
bottom or where the coiled tubing is to be run without check valves, Shear-Seal BOPs
shall be employed and installed onto the tree or wellhead, to give a reasonable
expectation that once cut, the coil tubing shall drop to regain control of the tree valves.
When Shear-Seal BOPs are employed, all connections between them and the tree or
wellhead shall be flanged and double valve isolated, removing the inclusion of
elastomers at connections beneath these BOPs.
f) Shear seal and shear ram preventers shall be capable of shearing the coil and any lines
within it, at all pressures up to the preventer's maximum working pressure. When lower
shear seal preventers are equipped with single needle valve pressure equalising
capability, the valve shall be replaced with a plug.

Page 24
g) A choke manifold containing at least two adjustable chokes shall be installed, unless the
normal production flowline is used through the tree and production manifold. In this
case, the single production choke is sufficient.
h) Unless pressure deployment is used, the lubricator shall be of sufficient length to
contain the BHA between the swab valve and the pack-off.
i) Active/live annulus outlets below the BOP shall be double valved on pressure
deployment operations.
j) Dual flapper check valves shall be run above the bottomhole assembly on all strings
unless the planned operation precludes their use. When not utilised, the programme
should include a detailed assessment of risks, mitigations and contingency responses.
k) When elastomer seals are used they shall be made of a material intended for exposure to
wellbore fluids.
l) The vapour pressure and OCFP (flash point) shall be known for all potentially
flammable fluids. Special precautions shall be in place.
m) Remaining coil tubing fatigue life shall be known and monitored prior to and during
each job. A coil replacement philosophy should be in place commensurate with
operating conditions. The position of all welds and the fluid exposure history shall be
documented for each reel of tubing.
n) For coil tubing operations the maximum operating tension loads of 80% of ultimate
minimum strength may not be exceeded.
o) To ensure that it will always be possible to unlatch the riser from a subsea well, the
lower riser assembly must be capable of severing coiled tubing of the maximum wall
thickness to be used and/or wireline and/or control lines within, and provide a seal.

Page 25
14.8 WATER-OIL RATIO/GAS-OIL RATIO CONTROL
Water and gas production is intimately associated with maximising gas and oil reserves. Gas or
water flow that effectively pushes oil to a production well are desirable and can allow relatively
high recovery factors. However when gas or water drive does not exert any pressure gradient on the
oil in the direction of the production wells, these unwanted fluids will be produced without benefit
to production and at great cost.
Excessive water or gas production results in unnecessary loss of reservoir energy/flow capacity.
This can result in inefficient or reduced hydrocarbon recovery. In addition the influx can cause
problems such as souring, corrosion, scale, poor separation, water disposal and impaired lift that
significantly increase operating costs.
The techniques used to manage unwanted water and gas production in completions can contribute
significantly to achieving optimum field value. The aim of this section is to give a brief overview of
the water and gas influx problems that can arise in wells. This includes the impact that completion
design can have on the ability to intervene to reduce unwanted fluid breakthrough, the means of
diagnosing problems and the means of treating them.
The water and gas control website on the BP Intranet given below provides a useful resource for all
aspects of the technology discussed in this section.
Well Target Identification Guidelines
It also provides links to sites where more specific information can be found.

14.8.1 The Source Of The Problem

Anomalous water-oil ratios (WOR) or gas-oil ratios (GOR) may be the result of various discrete
problems or combinations of them (reference Jon Elphick, Unpublished paper, “A classification of
Water Problem Types”, 1997). The main problem types are represented below.
 Casing, tubing or packer leaks.

Oil

Water

Figure 14.8 – Representation Of Water Production Via A Casing Leak

Page 26
 Flow behind casing, for example due to a poor cement bond, or formation wash-out,
leading to channels behind the casing.

Oil

Water

Figure 14.9 – Channelling Behind Casing

 Poorly positioned perforations (due, for example, to insufficient standoff or perforation

into channels for water or gas).
 Movement of the gas/oil or water/oil contact in response to reservoir depletion or
secondary gas cap development (predictable by reservoir theory or modelling).

Figure 14.10 – Representation Of Water Encroachment

 Vertical coning or lateral cusping of adjacent fluid contacts due to high draw-downs
and/or high vertical permeabilities, or fractures.
 One or more high permeability formation zones (stringers) being depleted or flooded-
out. These can be capable of crossflow and can be vertical or areal in nature.

Page 27
 Injector Producer

Figure 14.11 – High Premeabilty Layer Without Crossflow

Injector Producer

Figure 14.12 – High Premeability Layer With Crossflow

Aquifer

Figure 14.13 – Poor Areal Sweep

Page 28
  Natural or induced (hydraulic or thermal) fracturing out of zone to an aquifer, gas cap,
or between an injector and producer.

Figure 14.14 – Fractures Contacting An Aquifer

Figure 14.15 – Fractures Contacting An Injector

 Well is positioned too close to an injector.

 Water under-run (gravity segregated flow).

Injector Producer

Figure 14.16 – Representation Of Water Under-Run

Some of these are represented, together with their relative severity in the Figure 14.17 below.

Page 29
 Figure 14.17 – Typical Problems Indicating Severity

14.8.2 General Completion Considerations

Note: If water drive from injection or an active aquifer is anticipated, then plans
should be made for the water production. The future viability of the production
may depend on controlling the volumes and rates produced.

Drilling and completion techniques, to avoid water and gas problems or assist in future
interventions, include:
 Adjusting the TD in thick zones so that the OWC or GWC is not penetrated, which
avoids cement-channelling problems.
 Use of horizontal wells to reduce the coning potential.
 The use of external casing packers at the top and bottom of the pay zone to prevent
channelling (cement filled packers are preferred).
 Adapt the perforation strategy to the anticipated mechanism of water breakthrough – see
below for more detail on this.
 Keep the maximum deviation in the well below 70oC and restrict well length to 17,000ft
to permit easier future coiled tubing access. This subject is further addressed below.
 Modifications to the completion design to enable zonal isolation should be considered.
This can entail relatively simple precautions such as inserting blank pipe sections at
intervals into cased-hole completions to allow packers and plugs to be set. These are
usually most effective when located across impermeable zones such as shales, which
provide vertical flow isolation of the target zone within the reservoir.
 Tags built into the completion and in particular the blank sections makes depth control
in coiled tubing interventions much more accurate.

Page 30
  Select casing and tubing sizes which are compatible with existing inflatable packer
expansion capabilities. These can be found from completion reports and guidelines
found within the Water and Gas control Guidelines site at.

Water and Gas Control Guidelines

14.8.2.1 Effect Of Perforation Strategy On Future Water Control Interventions

With the exception of bullhead treatments discussed later, water control options in production or
injection wells rely on the isolation of the target zone from the oil producing zone(s) to be
preserved. Matrix gel treatments are usually more successful if small zones are treated. In large
zones the penetration of injected gelant can vary enormously because of differences in zonal
pressure and permeability. This can be predicted and countered by suitable reservoir simulation
taking into account the rheology of the injected gelant, but it can also be minimized at the
completion design stage.

Inflatable straddle packer with

sliding sleeve to allow treatment of
zones in mid - formation Blank casing sections
to allow use of
inflatable packers
and facilitate
selective interventions

Shale zone

Low
Pemeability
Zone

Figure 14.18 – Completion Planning For Future Water Control

Sections of unperforated casing placed at intervals improves the ability to temporarily or

permanently isolate portions of the reservoir using any of the mechanical or chemical options
available. The placement of blank sections is dictated by the reservoir lithology and should be
placed against flow barriers such as shales. If the distance between suitable shales, or low
permeability zones, is very large, the type of isolation method to be used should be considered, for
example the use of an inflatable straddle to assist in CT cement or gel squeezing depends upon the
length of straddle which can be delivered by the available treatment rigs.

Page 31
The length of the blank sections required is determined by the accuracy of depth measurement
inherent in the intervention. If the intervention is to use electric line (which has good correlation)
then the blank section can be as short as 2m. More normally the minimum length of the blank
section is 3m.
For coiled tubing interventions which does not have GR/CCL logging capability, the desirable blank
section length is a tubing joint of about 10m to allow for the significant potential errors in depth
control. Depth control may be improved by CT stretch and thermal expansion using a program such
as WELLCAT. Hybrid methods can also be used to improve depth control, for example a base
packer can be set accurately using electric line for physical tagging for a CT straddle to accurately
achieve the zonal isolation.
In sand control completions the use of external casing packers outside the blank sections provides
the isolation required for effective placement, though their reliability has been poor historically. A
developing alternative provided by some service companies is the use of retrofit chemical packers
which are based on cement or resin.

14.8.3 Planning For Water Or Gas Control Intervention

To overcome an excess fluid problem an engineer needs to:
 Identify the nature of the problem and set the aims for the treatment.
 Determine the potential value of the intervention.
 Select a suitable shut-off technique (including a means of zonal isolation if required)
 Select the service provider carefully; plan the intervention in detail, considering the
appropriate level of peer review.
 Monitor and supervise the work.
 Record and maintain any production restrictions due to the treatment.
 Capture the corporate knowledge.

Aspects of these steps will be considered in more detail in the following sections.

14.8.4 Problem Identification

The mechanism and point of influx of unwanted water or gas production normally must be
understood to successfully treat water and gas control problems. Accurate problem diagnosis can be
an expensive step, however long-standing experience within many service and producing companies
(including BP) has shown that incorrect diagnosis is the single largest cause of failed water and gas
control interventions, reference Anchala Ramasamy, Project Report 1999, ‘Well target identification
guidelines’ accessible through:

Water and Gas Control Website - Well Target Identification Guidelines

Completion design should allow the option of logging to establish the exact location of water or gas
breakthrough.
Possible exceptions can arise where:
 The cost of the diagnosis exceeds the risked potential value that could be obtained from
a well intervention.
 An intervention option exists which is inexpensive compared with the cost of the
diagnosis.

Page 32
  The risked loss from a failed intervention is acceptable, the probability of success is
reasonable, and the alternatives such as abandonment or sidetrack are unattractive.

The most obvious example id the later is the use of a wireline plug in a field which has a history of
bottom-water influx successfully controlled by such plugs. Running a log is not necessary if it is
expensive and it is recommended to run the plug and, if the outcome is a surprise failure, then pull
or mill it out (using CT). A similar argument may be made for bottom cement plugs and, in due
time, for bullhead chemicals WSO squeezes. For theses, however, reversibility is more of an issue.
It is recommended that decisions are supported by a simple life-of-well risked value anaysis.

14.8.4.1 Diagnosic Techniques

Various tests and logs can help to determine how the water or gas reaches the well (refer to section
14.8.1 also Bill Bailey, Mike Crabtree, Jeb Tyree, Jon Elphick, Fikri Kuchuk, Christian Romano
and Leo Roodhart. Oilfield review, Spring 2000, 30 – 51, “Water Control”). The techniques
available can be categorised as follows:
Category Examples
For example this can allow thief zone identification when
Production history plots
water breaks through at a low recovery factor.
A semi log plot of fluid rates versus cumulative
hydrocarbon produced is often a straight line. Deviations
Decline curve analysis
from this can highlight problems or determine the value of
treatments.
The variation of water cut with choke setting can help
Choke back/Shut – in distinguish between coning (Water cut goes down as choke
analysis is progressively closed) and high pressure zonal inflow
(Water cut goes up as choke is progressively closed)
Log WOR versus Log Preliminary identification of breakthrough mechanism –
Data Analysis
cum oil (Diagnostic) see below for a more complete description.
plots
Injector/Producer fluid Injector/Producer fluid history correlations.
history correlations
Fence plots based on open hole logs or data implicit in the
Lithological correlations reservoir model, correlating zones from well to well to
identify potential thief zones and vertical zonal isolation.
To determine the source of the water and degree of
injection water breakthrough. These can be particularly
Fluid analyses
useful in distinguishing between condensed (fresh) and
inflow (usually saline) water in gas wells.
Production logs To identify the location and rate of water or gas influx.
Injection well spinner To locate the injector end of a thief zone.
Logging surveys
Warmback logs To locate channels behind casing.
Specialist logs Such as PNL/Borax to detect channels behind casing.
Pulse/Interference tests To identify strongly connected injectors and producers.
Well Tests To determine the severity of breakthrough from an injector
Tracer tests
to a producer.
Table 14.5 – List Of Techniques

Page 33
14.8.4.2 Diagnostic Plots
Diagnostic plots were proposed by Dowell (Schlumberger) as a means of elucidating the mechanism
of water breakthrough to a producing well. Water-oil ratio is plotted against cumulative time or
preferably cumulative volume of production. These plots can be used to highlight anomalies in the
production behaviour of a well in relation to the workover history, etc.
As an example, when layers of different permeability breakthrough ‘steps’ may be seen in the linear
regions.

Figure 14.19 – WOR Plot Indicating Water Breakthrough Steps

Quality of data is an important issue; the best basis for the plot is test separator data. Grabbed
samples are not good and assigned values have proven suspect. The data available should be
evaluated on the basis of reliability (including instrumentation/recording), source and frequency.
Diagnostic plots are a tool to be used alongside the others available for well diagnosis. The plots
and their use were described in two SPE papers K. S. Chan, SPE 30775, 1995, "Water Control
Diagnostic Plots" and K. S. Chan, A. J. Bond, R. F. Keese and Q. Lai, SPE 36614, 1996,
"Diagnostic plots evaluate gas shut off treatments at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska" (also refer to sections
14.8.2 and 14.8.3). More detailed notes on their interpretation are also available (H. Frampton,
unpublished notes, “Diagnostic plots”.). Derivative data were believed, at the time of publication of
SPE 30775, to give a valuable diagnostic contribution, but have since been determined to be subject
to considerable noise, when field data are used, and to be ambiguous in some cases. The use of the
plot no longer relies heavily on the derivative curve.

14.8.4.3 Estimating The Benefit Of The Intervention

The means of estimating the benefit of the intervention depends to some extent on what information
is available. The first step is to obtain an estimate of the post treatment water cut. This can be
obtained from the reservoir model if it is sufficiently detailed, or from production logs building in
assumptions about the degree of shut-off. The reduced water cut should be built in to a ‘Prosper’
model for the well and a sensitivity study run to provide input parameters for the appropriate asset
financial evaluation spreadsheets and procedures.

Page 34
The issue of the production profile over the (estimated) lifetime of the treatment will need to be
addressed at this point. This can be obtained, for example, from the field simulation or by analogy
with previous treatments. If sufficient information is not available from the field model, or if the
block size is too large, it may be necessary to build a fine gridded sector model to allow accurate
evaluation of the treatment. This can usually be done in the field simulator, but can also be done
using ‘BPOPE’ or ‘Reveal’ simulators when fluid parameters and temperatures are of importance.

14.8.5 Treatment Options

Unwanted water and gas production can usually be reduced and sometimes eliminated by one of a
number of means. The techniques for achieving this have become routine and relatively reliable
over the last century, though it should be noted that, as with any sub-surface intervention, the
success rate for water and gas shut off is not 100 percent. Industry average is only about 50%
success for most methods except for bottom-sealing cement/permanent plugs. The techniques may
be broadly categorised according to the depth of penetration in matrix treatments as follows:
Location Of Effect Technique
Cement
Plugs
In wellbore Inflatable plugs
Patches
Other mechanical methods
Microfine cement
Very near wellbore (Inches to feet) Chemical gel systems
Chemical resin systems
Chemical polymer or gel systems
Less near wellbore (feet to tens of feet) Chemical resin system (becomes expensive with
depth)
Table 14.6 – Treatment Options

Other treatment techniques include optimising injection and production rates (to divert the water or
gas into a different path), selective stimulation of the oil pay, installation of selective completions
and sidetracking the well. These will not be considered herein but often are viable alternatives to a
corrective intervention. The main classes of treatment are discussed below. Further web based
assistance in technique selection and evaluation, as well as much background information, is
available in the Water and Gas Control Guidelines at:
Water and Gas Control Guidelines

14.8.5.1 Remedial Cementations

Remedial cementation and re-perforation is often successful in shutting-off the unwanted fluids
without causing any significant damage to the oil pay. Some wells have been squeezed and re-
perforated many times to keep the drainage point optimally positioned in a depleting oil leg.
Remedial cementation may include any the following remedies:
 Re-cementation of an identifiable channel through the primary cement sheath.
 Placement of cement in a washout, which bypasses the primary cement.
 Placement of cement into a natural fracture system.
 Bottom plug-backs or dump bailing cement.
 Squeezing off unwanted perforations.
 Squeezing off leaking or broken casing couplings.

Page 35
Special formulations such as foamed cement, low filter loss, thixotropic or highly accelerated
cement and/or techniques such as coiled tubing, dump bailing or simultaneous water injection down
the annulus may be needed to improve the chances of success, or to reduce costs. With the
exception of foamed cement for fracture treatments, remedial cementation techniques are effective
within, or near the wellbore, and usually require the target zone to be isolated before treatment.
Remedial cementations may form part of the initial completion operations if water breakthrough is
expected to occur on well start-up.

14.8.5.2 Tubing Patches

Tubing patches have found increasing use in correcting the adverse effects of failed tubulars and can
also be used, for example, to abandon sets of perforations provided good isolation still exists behind
the casing. The options available are:
 Installation of a scab liner
 Installation of expandable tubing (this uses a hydraulic tool to spread smaller gauge
tubing up to the size required)
 Placement of resin based composites (Patchflex/Drillflex) expanded into place and heat
cured to set (refer to Figure 14.20)

Figure 14.20 – Drillflex Patch Being Deployed

Page 36
14.8.5.3 Packers And Plugs
Packers can be used to provide isolation of a water or gas producing section of a well. They can be
used singly (sometimes in conjunction with a plug) or in pairs with tubing to achieve a straddle
across a problem mid-zone. The use of inflatable packers allow the option of reversing the isolation
at some future time without the need to drill out a permanent packer or plug.
Issues which need to be considered for such remedies include:
 The condition of the tubulars where the inflatable is to be seated. Corroded, scaled up or
deformed tubulars will not allow secure seating.
 The expansion ratio required - the range of expansions achievable although good is
limited. It is necessary to confirm that inflatable packers selected to fit inside the tubing
can seat in the larger casing.
 The effect of wellbore temperature changes on the setting pressure. As the temperature
at the packer rises the internal pressure also increases accordingly. Vents control this
within a safe range, but if cooling occurs again, for example during a scale inhibitor
squeeze, the internal pressure may be too low to retain the seal. Running wellbore
temperature simulations may be advantageous in the packer selection and setting
pressure.

14.8.5.4 Chemical Gel Systems

Chemical gel systems are soluble formulations that polymerise to form a crosslinked polymers
(reference H. Frampton in “Recent Advances in Oilfield Chemistry”, Ed. P. H. Ogden, Royal
Society of Chemistry, 1994, 295 – 300, “Chemical Gel Systems for Improved Oil Recovery” and
Robert D. Sydansk, SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Reservoir Engineering chapter on
“Polymers, Gels, Foams and Resins”). After setting, these can vary in consistency from being
flowable (like the children’s toy ‘slime’) to becoming a hard resin. Gels are usually placed as a
solution to cementation which cannot penetrate small fractures and pores.

14.8.5.5 Monomer Gel Systems

Gels based on silicate or aluminate ions are commercially available from major service companies
and have been used successfully to treat fractures and thief zones. They are typically activated by
adding acid, or delayed release acid on injection. One advantage of such systems is that they have
low viscosity and are easy to pump. The weakness or brittleness of the gel, relative to resins can be a
disadvantage.
Other low viscosity, organic monomer based systems equivalent to Civil engineering Acrylate
grouts are available and form strong gels.

14.8.5.6 Polymers And Polymer Based Gel

These systems can be used to achieve a shut-off within the pore system of matrix rock and some can
be used to treat fractures. Simple polymers will only shut off water in low permeable rock. For
higher permeabilities, associstive polymers or polymer gels are required. All these systems may be
placed in the water-producing zone using CT/packers or (in some cases only) plugs/straddles. Some
can also be bullheaded from surface without zone isolation (addressed later).

Page 37
The first patents on water shut off gels made by crosslinking water soluble polymers were filed in
the mid - 1960's by Phillips and since then many variations have been patented and many of these
have been subjected to field trial. Few have achieved commercial availability. Still fewer have a
successful track record. However, many thousands of successful WSO treatments have been
reported.
A polymer is a large ‘Macromolecule’ composed of ‘Monomer’ units joined together in a chain like
structure. If it were stretched out the chain could be anything up to about two microns long
compared with about one nanometre or less for a monomer unit. Polymers used for water and gas
control gels are typically dissolved in water and a ‘Crosslinker’ is added to join the macromolecules
together to form a network or ‘gel’. The gels can be weak (large polymers at low concentrations
with few crosslinks), strong (small polymers at higher concentrations with more crosslinks) or
resins (very small polymers joined together with many crosslinks).
The speed of the gel forming reaction increases with temperature. For early gels. Treatments on
producing wells in fields with reservoir temperature above about 60oC needed pre-cooling of the
terget zone. Wellbore temperature simulation (WellCat) is highly recommended when applying near
wellbore treatments such as these. In the 1990's higher temperature low molecular weight polymer
gels were developed which can be applied direct.
The main commercial classes of polymer/gels are shown in the table below.
Chemical Systems Examples And Comments
Some resins formulations can be very viscous.
Lower concentrations with lower viscosities can
Phenoplast – must be placed with CT or dump bailer
be used in matrix rock, e.g. Schlumberger
Organoseal
Epoxy Grout – must be placed Some resins formulations can be very viscous.
Simple or associate polymers (no added BJ AquaCon; Halliburton HMP(FDP-W658);
crosslinkeder) - can be bullheaded or placed with CT Clariant Reltreat 55-047.
Chromium (III) crosslinked low molecular weight Mixtures tend to be viscous (about 40 to 100cP).
polymers – must be placed They also tend to be too weak for fractures or
voids. There are lots of track record. ‘Maraseal’
and equivalents.
Crosslinked medium molecular weight polymers – Clariant Reltreat systems.
can be bullheaded or placed with CT
Chromium (III) crosslinked high molecular weight Mixtures tend to be viscous (about 40 to 100cP).
polymers – can be bullheaded or placed with CT Gels are weak but good for fractures where they
appear to dehydrate to block firmly. Lots of track
record. ‘Marcit’ (e.g. from Sclumberger, ‘Matrol’
from Halliburton and equivalents.
Organic crosslinked low molecular weight polymers Some of these can be used at high temperatures,
– must be placed e.g. Halliburton H2zero.
Table 14.7 – Types Of Commercial Polymer Gel Classes

Grouting is the term commonly used for the placement of a strong, resin type chemical plugging
agent (such as a phenoplast). Exxon, Unocal and others have used Phenoplast systems to good
effect. A cement squeeze can be used to hold a grout or gel treatment in place. Issues to be
considered are:
Cost: Epoxy, phenolic or aldehyde resins tend to be expensive and their use is normally limited
to small volume treatments.
HS&E: Some of the resin systems have components which require special handling precautions
and some are very viscous.

Page 38
Water based grouts have proven useful in treating problems, for example, channels in cement
behind casing where the cement could not be squeezed away.

14.8.5.7 Treatment Application

Water and gas control gel treatments are offered by many service companies, but often constitute a
small proportion of their overall field work. Though world-class experts and experienced crews are
available, it should not be assumed that personnel provided are experienced in the work. Provision
should be made to ensure that the planner and crew have suitable experience and it is usually
worthwhile holding a Peer review of proposals.

14.8.5.8 Achieving Zonal Isolation

Most of the cement and chemical techniques described above require the target zone to be isolated
using mechanical barriers of some kind to prevent the treatment entering the rest (usually the
majority) of the producing formation. Isolation techniques include:
 Sand Back Bottom Zones For Treating Upper Zones
Sand or Calcium Carbonate can be used. Generally calcium carbonate is less dense and
so easier to lift out than sand and can acidised out afterwards if needed, but it can be
harder to ensure that it sinks neatly during placement and goes only where required. The
particle size distribution of the fill can be adjusted to give the permeability required, or
the sand can be capped with cement, acid soluble cement, latex, resin or a spotted down
gel plug to render it effectively impermeable. In higher zones the technique can be of
use if there is a location for a packer below a zone that needs protecting. A packer set
below the zone to be protected essentially renders it a bottom zone. The ability of the
base packer to hold the increased load exerted by the fill must be assessed before any
use of this technique. This is also an issue for the use of fill in the upper completions.
Cross flow from below the fill to above needs evaluation and correction before using the
technique. Caution should be exercised in the use of Calcium Carbonate fill particularly
in acid soluble formations. After the treatment is applied to the upper intervals of the
zone the fill is removed by a coiled tubing wash-out operation. The particle size
distribution of the sand determines both how easily the fill is broken down and how
efficiently the sand particles are transported out of the well. Difficulties can be
encountered with particles settling on the shoulders of S-shaped wells. Detailed analysis
of these aspects is also beyond the scope of this document, but can be achieved using
established tools such as Schlumberger’s ‘CoilCade’ software.
 Plugs
 Inflatable packers and straddles
The efffect of the temperature variations before, during and after treatments are of
critical importance to the use of recoverable inflatable packers. Thermal simulation used
in evaluation of the vented pressure of the inflated element are usually critical steps in
planning a treatment. Good thermal modelling results can be achieved using
Halliburton’s ‘WellCat’ software.
Diverting agents cannot currently be recommended for selective injection of chemical gel systems.
There are questions over impermeability to the treatment solutions and post treatment clean up can
be incomplete, leaving residual formation damage in the zones protected.

Page 39
14.8.5.9 Recovery From Failed Treatments
If a treatment fails to provide the desired effect, recovery methods may be necessary. These vary
enormously in nature and should be considered during the planning of an intervention. A specific
option that should be considered is the use of dissolvers for gels and resins. These tend to be
successful in laboratory tests but in the field the critical step is not the effectiveness of the breaking,
but the ability of the breaker to contact the gel. Soaking, swabbing or jetting may aid in achieving
this. Some organically-crosslinked systems are difficult to break.

14.8.5.10 Post Treatment Production Restrictions

Some treatments may require subsequent production to operate within rate or drawdown limits. This
is to prevent, for example, the return of gel to the surface. This may create a problem in water
treatment hydrocyclones. Similarly, cement squeezes in horizontal wells with ESPs may require a
rate limitation to avoid loose cement entering the ESP. Inflatable plugs will also need to be operated
within a drawdown limit.

14.8.6 Dual Completions And Complex Wells

Access to the upper zones of dual completions using coiled tubing and wireline is limited by the risk
of entanglement with the lower zone tubulars. These also render mechanical zonal isolation within
the upper zones impossible with currently available technology. Mechanical methods cannot be
used in the upper zones because of the presence of the adjacent tubulars connecting to the bottom
zone. Use of selected diverting agents or sand fill to achieve selective injection of cement or other
chemical treatments may be possible if the upper zone is thin enough in the target well to allow a
CT wash out. Bullhead treatments are generally to be preferred if they are capable of achieving the
desired effect.
Zonal isolation might potentially be achieved to apply treatments to the upper part of the upper
zones of multiple completions if:
a) Coiled tubing access can be confirmed.
b) The risk of hang up is accepted.
c) Sand or calcium carbonate fill above the packer at the base of the upper completion can
be managed.

Relatively low risk access to the individual bores for intervention in multilateral wells is not
normally feasible and the best options for these tend to be bullhead treatments described below.

14.8.7 Bullhead Treatments

Both access and zonal isolation problems can potentially be avoided by using bullhead chemical
systems. Three distinct sub-groups have been considered.
 Marcit treatments for fractures (reference Robert D. Sydansk, SPE Petroleum
Engineering Handbook, reservoir engineering chapter on ‘Polymers, Gels, Foams and
Resins’.
These are well proven in the field and have good success rates. They have been widely
used in all BP, Amoco and Arco heritage organisations on both production and injection
wells. Details of many case histories are available in the Water and Gas control
guidelines and a literature review up to the year 2000 is available.

Page 40
 Advanced Relative Permeability Modifiers (reference J. Morgan, A. Gunn, G. Fitch, H.
Frampton, R. Harvey, D. Thrasher, R. Lane, R. McLure, K. H. Heier, C. Kayser, SPE
78540 and also SPE 80206).
Various chemical technologies are now available which can provide relative
permeability modification in the temperature range up to 125oC. The flow of water in
the pores of the reservoir rock is significantly impeded while the flow of oil is
unaffected. Some example systems were noted in Table 14.7.
 Bright Water.
A field trial of a particulate chemical system for improvement of water flood sweep was
conducted in 2001 and shows promise. It is applied as a slug treatment and propagates
through the reservoir matrix to activate away from the well providing in-depth
conformance control (reference H. Frampton, Proceedings of the BP Well Performance
Conference 2000, York, UK ‘Bright Wter: Water Flood Sweep Improvement made
easy’.

Page 41
14.9 References
WVAS Well Intervention Section
Wells Value Assurance System - Well Intervention

Drilling and Well Operations Policies BPA-D-001

BP Drilling and Well Operations Policy
ERD Guidelines
ERD Guidelines
Well Interventions
Well Performance and Interventions website

Water and Gas Control

Water and Gas Control

Water and Gas control Guidelines

Water and Gas Control Guidelines

Jon Elphick, Unpublished paper, “A classification of Water Problem Types”, 1997.

Bill Bailey, Mike Crabtree, Jeb Tyree, Jon Elphick, Fikri Kuchuk, Christian Romano and Leo
Roodhart. Oilfield review, Spring 2000, 30 – 51, “Water Control”.

K. S. Chan, SPE 30775, 1995, "Water Control Diagnostic Plots"

K. S. Chan, A. J. Bond, R. F. Keese and Q. Lai, SPE 36614, 1996, "Diagnostic plots evaluate gas
shut off treatments at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska".

H. Frampton, unpublished notes, “Diagnostic plots”.

A. Gyani. Chemical Diversion, “Lessons Learnt, Guidelines and Case Studies”, UTG Well
Performance Report 1999.

H. Frampton in “Recent Advances in Oilfield Chemistry”, Ed. P. H. Ogden, Royal Society of

Chemistry, 1994, 295 – 300, “Chemical Gel Systems for Improved Oil Recovery”

Robert D. Sydansk, SPE Petroleum Engineering Handbook, due for publication in 2002, Reservoir
Engineering chapter on “Polymers, Gels, Foams and Resins”.

R.J. Fulleylove, J.C. Morgan, D.G. Stevens & D.R.Thrasher. SPE 36211 7th ADIPEC, 13-16
October 1996. "Water Shut-Off in Oil Production Wells - Lessons from 12 Treatments"

Wahju Wibowo, John H. Gould, Antares Munir, and David A. Rich. SPE 56737. “First Four Water
Shut-Off Treatments in ONWJ Field: Design, Execution, Evaluation, and Strategy for the Next
Treatments”

Page 42
J Morgan, A Gunn, G Fitch, H Frampton, R Harvey, D Thrasher; R Lane ; R McClure, K H Heier,
C Kayser. SPE 78540, ”Development and Deployment of a “Bullheadable” Chemical System for
Selective Water shut off leaving Oil/Gas Production Unharmed”

H. Frampton, Proceedings of the BP Well Performance Conference 2000, York, UK. “Bright Water:
Water Flood Sweep Improvement made easy”

Anchala Ramasamy, Project report 1999, “Well target identification guidelines” accessible through
the Water and Gas control web site:

Page 43