Advertisement

Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

, Volume 43, Issue 11, pp 6481–6491 | Cite as

Reaction of Chelating Agents with Guar Gum Polymer for Completion Fluid

  • Salaheldin Elkatatny
  • Mohamed Mahmoud
  • Khaled Abdelgawad
Research Article - Petroleum Engineering
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

Guar gum polymer is used extensively in the upstream applications such as hydraulic fracturing and gravel pack operations in unconsolidated sandstones. Guar gum will form a filter cake either on the fracture face or on the gravel, and this will affect the well productivity. There is an essential need to remove the filter cake formed by guar gum to enhance the well performance and enhance the oil and gas production rate. The reaction of guar gum with different chelating agents was assessed in this paper. Chelating agents like diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA), ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and glutamic acid diacetic acid (GLDA) were used at different concentrations, temperature, time, and pH. An optimum formulation was developed to remove guar gum filter cake formed after gravel packing and hydraulic fracturing operations. Fourier transform infrared was used to explain the mechanism of the reaction between guar gum and chelating agents. It is the first time to assess the reaction between chelating agents and guar gum. The results obtained showed that the DTPA, EDTA, and GLDA highly affect the apparent viscosity of the guar gum solution (GG solution). Based on the experimental work, 20 wt% GLDA at pH 7 decreased the apparent viscosity of GG solution from 51 to 9 cP at a shear rate of 170.3 S\(^{-1 }\) after mixing for 24 h at \(200\,^{\circ }\hbox {F}\). The apparent viscosity of the GG solution decreased by 27% after mixing with 20 wt % EDTA (pH 12) at a shear rate of 170.3 S\(^{-1 }\) for 24 h at \(200\,^{\circ }\hbox {F}\). On the other hand, 20% DTPA at pH 4 and 7 at 170.3 S\(^{-1 }\)and \(200\,^{\circ }\hbox {F}\) did not reduce the GG solution apparent viscosity and based on that DTPA is not recommended for GG filter cake removal. The results of this research are very important for hydraulic fracturing operations to restore the fracture face permeability after filter cake removal. It will also open a research trend in the oil industry, especially in the fracturing and gravel packing operations.

Keywords

Guar gum Chelating agents Upstream Filter cake Hydraulic fracturing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Williams, B.; Gidley, J.; Schechter, R.: Acidizing Fundamentals. SPE Monograph Series, Richardson (1979)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caenn, R.; Darley, H.C.H.; Gray, G.R.: Composition and Properties of Drilling and Completion Fluids, Chapter 12: Introduction to Fracturing Fluids, 7th edn. Gulf Professional Publishing, Boston (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang, Z.; Li, G.; Tian, S.; Song, X.; Sheng, M.; Shah, S.: Abrasive Water Jet Perforation and Multi-Stage Fracturing, Chapter Nine: New Fracturing Fluids and Fracturing Methods. Gulf Professional Publishing, Boston (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhou, X.; Burbey, T.J.: Fluid effect on hydraulic fracture propagation behavior: a comparison between water and supercritical CO2-like fluid. Geofluids 14(02), 174–188 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dogon, D.; Golombok, M.: Wellbore to fracture proppant-placement-fluid rheology. J. Unconv. Oil Gas Resour. 14, 12–21 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juogr.2016.01.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chudzikowski, R.J.: Guar gum and its application. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 22, 43–60 (1971)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Whitcomb, P.J.; Gutowski, J.W.; Howland, W.: Rheology of guar solutions. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 25(12), 2815–2827 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    AlQuraishi, A.A.; Alsewailem, F.D.: Adsorption of Guar, Xanthan and Xanthan-Guar mixtures on high salinity, high temperature reservoirs. In: Paper OMC-2011-161, Presented at the Offshore Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition, 23–25 March, Ravenna, Italy (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blamble, E.A.; Pyncheon, J.: Guar replacement with synthetic polymers—Utica Shale case histories. In: Paper SPE 179012-MS Presented at the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, 24–26 February, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Srichamroen, A.: Influence of temperature and salat on the viscosity properties of guar gum. Naresuan Univ. J. 15(2), 55–62 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang, L.M.; Zhou, J.F.; Hui, P.S.: A comparative study on viscosity behaviour of water soluble chemically modified guar gum derivatives with different functional lateral groups. J. Sci. Food Agric. 85, 2638–2644 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Economides, M.J.; Nolte, K.G.: Reservoir Stimulation, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gidley, J.L.; Holditch, S.A.; Nierode, D.E.; Veatch, R.W.: Recent Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, Texas (1989)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Menjivar, J.A.: Use of Gelation Theory to Characterize Metal Crosslinked Polymer Gels. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC (1986)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Robinson, J.; Ross-Murphy, S.B.; Morris, E.R.: Viscosity-molecular weight relationships, intrinsic chain flexibility, and dynamic solution properties of guar glactomannan. Carbohydr. Res. 107, 17–32 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rubinstein, M.; Colby, R.H.: Polymer Physics. Oxford University Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clark, P.E.; Balakrishnan, M.; Sundram, L.: Crosslinking of hydroxypropyl guar with metal ions. In: Paper SPE 25208-MS Presented at the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, 2–5 March, New Orleans, Louisiana (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weaver, J.; Gdanski, R.; Karcher, A.: Guar gum degradation: a kinetic study. In: Paper SPE 80226-MS Presented at the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, 5–7 February, Houston, Texas (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ewing, B.C.; Pabley, A.S.; Callaway, R.E.: A Synergistic chelation system for acidizing in the presence of high iron concentrations. In: Presented at the SPE Oilfield and Geothermal Chemistry Symposium, 1–3 June, Denver, Colorado. SPE-11795-MS.  https://doi.org/10.2118/11795-MS (1983)
  20. 20.
    Ba-Geri, B.S.; Mahmoud, M.A.; Abdulraheem, A.; Al-Mutairi, S.H.; Elkatatny, S.M.; Shawabkeh, R.A.: Single stage filter cake removal of barite weighted water-based drilling fluid. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 149, 476–484 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2016.10.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mahmoud, M.A.; Kamal, M.; Ba-Geri, B.S.; Hussein, I.: Removal of pyrite and different types of iron sulfide scales in oil and gas wells without H2S generation. In: Presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, 6–9 December. IPTC-18279-MS.  https://doi.org/10.2523/18279-MS (2015)
  22. 22.
    Shende, A.V.: Dissolution of Barite Scale using Chelating Agents. Master’s thesis, Texas A&M University (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crabetree, M.; Eslinger, D.; Fletcher, P.; Miller, M.; Johnson, A.; King, G.: Fighting scale-removal and prevention. Oilfield Review 11(3), 30–45 (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elkatatny, S.: New formulation for iron sulfide scale removal. In: Paper SPE-183914-MS Presented at SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 6–9 March (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lakatos, I.; Lakatos-Szabo, J.; Kosztin, B.: Optimization of barite dissolvers by organic acids and pH regulation. In: Paper SPE-74667 Presented at International Symposium on Oilfield Scale, Aberdeen, United Kingdom, 30–31 January (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lakatos, I.; Lakatos-Szabo, J.; Kosztin, B.: Comparative study of different barite dissolvers: technical and economic aspects. In: Paper SPE 73719, Presented at International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, 20–21 February (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nasr-El-Din, H.A.; Al-Mutairi, S.H.; Al-Hajji, H.H.; Lynn, J.D.: Evaluation of a new barite dissolver: lab studies. In: Paper SPE 86501, Presented at SPE International Symposium on Exhibition and Formation Damage Control, 18–20 February (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mahmoud, M.A.; Kamal, M.S.; Ba-Geri, B.S.: Removal of pyrite and different types of iron sulfide scales in oil and gas wells without H\(_{2}\)S generation. In: Paper PTC-18279-MS Presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference Held in Doha, Qatar, 6–9 December (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Frenier, W.W.; Fredd, C.N.; Chang, F.: Hydroxyaminocarboxylic acids produce superior formulations for matrix stimulation of carbonates at high temperatures. In: Paper SPE-71696 Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 30 September–3 October, New Orleans, Louisiana (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frenier, W.; Brady, M.; Al-Harthy, S.; Arangath, R.; Chan, K.S.; Flamant, N.; Samuel, M.: Hot oil and gas wells can be stimulated without acids. SPE Prod. Facil. J. 19(4), 189–199 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mahmoud, M.A.; Nasr-El-Din, H.A.; De Wolf, C.; LePage, J.; Bemelaar, J.: Evaluation of a new environmentally friendly chelating agent for high-temperature applications. SPEJ 16(3), 559–574 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mahmoud, M.A.: Evaluating the damage due to calcium sulfate scale precipitation during low and high salinity water injection. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 53(3), 141–150 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nasr-El-Din, H.A.; De-Wolf, C.A.; Stanitzek, T.; Alex, A.K.; Gerdes, S.; Lummer, N.R.: Field treatment to stimulate a deep, sour, tight-gas well using a new, low corrosion and environmentally friendly fluid. SPE Prod. Oper. J. 28(03), 277–85 (2013b)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nasr-El-Din, H.A.; Dana, H.; Tomos, V.; Stanitzek, T.; De Wolf, C.A.; Alex, A.K.: Field treatment to stimulate an oil well in an offshore sandstone reservoir using a novel, low-corrosive, environmentally friendly fluid. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 54(5), 289–297 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mahmoud, M.A.; Abdelgawad, K.Z.: Chelating-agent enhanced oil recovery for sandstone and carbonate reservoirs. SPE J. 20(3), 483–495 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Devold, H.: Oil and Gas Production Handbook, An Introduction to Oil and Gas production, ABB ATPA Oil and Gas, Edition 1.3 Oslo (2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moslavac, B.; Matanovic, D.; Cikes, M.: Sand Control in Well Construction and Operation. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Penberthy Jr, W.L.; Echols, E.E.: Gravel placement in wells. J. Pet. Technol. 45(7), 612-613, 670-674 (1993). SPE-22793-PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Reddy, B.R.: Viscosification-on-demand: chemical modification of biopolymer to control their activity by triggers in aqueous solutions. In: International Symposium of Oilfield Chemistry, Woodlands, TX, 11–13 April, SPE-141007-MS (2011)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Underdown, D.R.; Calvert, A.L.; Newhouse, D.P.: Comparison of HEC and XC polymer gravel pack fluids. In: Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–11 October, SPE-19751-MS.  https://doi.org/10.2118/19751-MS (1989)
  41. 41.
    Almond S.; Bland, W.: The effects of break mechanism on gelling agent residue and flow impairment in 20/40 mesh sand. In: Presented at the Formation Damage Control Symposium, Bakersfield, 13–14 Feb 1984 (1984)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cooke, C.J.: Effects of fracturing fluids on fracture conductivity. J. Pet. Technol. 27(10), 1273–1282 (1975).  https://doi.org/10.2118/5114-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sokhanvarian, K.; Nasr-El-Din, H.; De-Wolf, C.: Thermal decomposition of chelating agents and a new mechanism of formation damage. In: Paper SPE 165153-MS Presented at the SPE European Formation Damage Conference and Exhibition, 5–7 June, Noordwijk, The Netherlands (2013)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Muhammad, S.; Imtiaz, A.; Abdur, R.: Effect of nitrogen levels on the yield and yield component of guar gum (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba). Am. Eurasian J. Sustain. Agric. 3(1), 29 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Petroleum EngineeringKing Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Petroleum DepartmentCairo UniversityCairoEgypt

Personalised recommendations