Advertisement

Sand Control Methods

  • Davorin Matanović
  • Marin Čikeš
  • Bojan Moslavac
Chapter
Part of the Springer Environmental Science and Engineering book series (SPRINGERENVIRON)

Abstract

The main purpose of any sand control method is to hold load bearing solids in the place. It is therefore necessary to determine what is in fact produced. Some fines are always produced, and that can be beneficial because that helps in cleaning pore space. The other (solids between 50 and 75 percentile ranges) that are real load bearing solids can be control through reduction of drag forces, by bridging sand mechanically or by increasing formation strength. That means some kind of production rate control, selective or oriented perforating, fracturing and gravel packing, use of screens and chemical consolidation.

In this chapter aim is to concentrate on sand control tools and procedures designed to prolong well life by eliminating sand production either mechanically trapping it behind various downhole devices or chemically consolidating the unconsolidated formations prone to produce sand. Open and cased hole installations are described, involving slotted liner, standalone screen and gravel packed completions. Through tubing sand control, frac-and-pack method completion and dual zone completions are presented as well. All these completions comprise of many different tools, accessories and devices like screens, packers, seal assemblies, running tools, blank pipes, safety joints and other. They are introduced as an overview of possible tool combinations in certain occasions.

Keywords

Slot Width Open Hole Coiled Tubing Blank Pipe Sand Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Nomenclature

Ag

Total area under the gravimetric profile

Ap

Total area under the curve of the pressure profile

C – factor

Empirical constant for evaluation of the risk of the erosion, Pa0.5

d10; 40; 50; 90; 95

Diameter of formation sand particle at (10; 40; 50; 90; 95 percentile) point, mm

D

Diameter of the gravel pack sand, mm

Di

Initial outer diameter of the pipe, m

Df

Final (expanded) pipe outer diameter, m

f

Fractal dimension of the sand

Fs

External surface area per meter of the liner, m2/m

K

The proportionality constant

le

Length of expanded slot part, m

ls

Slot length, m

m

Number of links between slots over the pipe cross section area

N(d ≥ di)

Determines the number of particles equal or greater than diameter of d i

ns

Number of slots per 1 m of the liner, m−1

SC

Sorting coefficient

Tp

Is the time for the pressure profile to reach 0.6895 MPa

UC

Uniformity coefficient

we

Slot width after expansion, m

ws

Slot width, m

αs

Total slot area of total external surface area of the liner, m2

References

  1. Ali S et al (2002) Combined stimulation and sand control. Oilfield Rev Summer 14:30–47Google Scholar
  2. Allen TO, Roberts AP (1978) Well completion design. In: Production operations, Part 1: Well completions, workover and stimulation,  Chapter 5. Oil & Gas Consultants International, Tulsa
  3. API RP 14 E (1991) Recommended practice for design and installation of offshore production platform piping systems, 5th edn. API, Washington, DC, 1 Oct 1991Google Scholar
  4. API RP 58 (1995) Recommended practice for testing sand used in gravel packing operations, 2nd edn. API, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker Oil Tools (2002) Sand control systems. Baker Hughes, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  6. Ballard T, Beare S (2003) Media sizing for premium sand screen: Dutch twill weaves, SPE 82244. In: SPE European formation damage conference, The Hague, 13–14 May 2003Google Scholar
  7. Belarby J (2009) Well completion design. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradley HB et al (1992) Petroleum engineering handbook. Society of Petroleum Engineers, RichardsonGoogle Scholar
  9. Buzarde LE Jr, Karl RL, Bell WT, De Priester CL (1982) Lecture Notes for: Production Operations Course 1: Well Completions, SPE of AIME, DallasGoogle Scholar
  10. Byrne M, Slayter A, McCurdy P (2010) Improved selection criteria for sand control – when are “fines” fines? SPE 128038. In: International symposium and exhibition on formation damage, Lafayette, 10–12 Feb 2010Google Scholar
  11. Chanpura RA, Hodge RM, Andrews JS, Toffanin EP, Moen T, Parlar M (2010) A review of screen selection for standalone applications and a new methodology, SPE 127931. In: SPE international symposium and exhibition on formation damage control, Lafayette, 10–12 Feb 2010Google Scholar
  12. Coberly CJ (1983) Selection of Screen Openings for Unconsolidated Sands. Drilling and Production Practice, 37–189Google Scholar
  13. Coberly CJ, Wagner EM (1938) Some Considerations in the Selection and Installation of Gravel Pack for Oil Wells. Pet Technol Vol. 1, No. 3, Aug 1938Google Scholar
  14. Constein V, Skidmore V (2006) Standalone screens selection using performance mastercurves, SPE 98363. In: SPE international symposium and exhibition on formation damage control, Lafayette, 15–17 Feb 2006Google Scholar
  15. Coulter AW, Gurley DG (1970) How to select the correct sand control system for your well, SPE 3177. In: 41st annual California regional meeting of the SPE of AIME, Santa Barbara, 28–30 Oct 1970Google Scholar
  16. DePriester CL (1964) Sand control, course materials, Chapter IVGoogle Scholar
  17. Durrett JL, Golbin WT, Murray JW, Tighe RE (1977) Seeking a solution to sand control, SPE 6210. J Pet Technol, December 1977, Vol. 29, No. 12, 1664–1672Google Scholar
  18. Engel SP, Mackey P (2001) Opportunities to improve the success rate of coiled-tubing operations, SPE 68429. In: SPE/ICoTA coiled tubing Roundtable, Houston, 7–8 Mar 2001Google Scholar
  19. Gillespie G, Deem CK, Malbrel C (2000) Screen selection for sand control based on laboratory tests, SPE 64398. SPE Asia Pacific oil and gas conference and exhibition, Brisbane, 16–18 Oct 2000Google Scholar
  20. Halliburton Energy Services (1994) FracPac completion services. Halliburton Energy Services, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison DJ, Johnson MH, Richard B (1990) Comparative study of prepacked screens, SPE 20027. In: 60th California regional meeting, Ventura, 4–6 Apr 1990Google Scholar
  22. Hecker MT et al. (2010) Extending openhole gravel packing capability: initial field installation of internal shunt alternate path technology. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, paper SPE 135102, Florence, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  23. Hill KE (1941) Factors affecting the use of gravel in oil wells. Drilling & Production Practice, APIGoogle Scholar
  24. Hodge RM, Burton RC, Constein VG, Skidmore V (2002) An evaluation method for screen-only and gravel-pack completions. In: SPE 73722, international symposium and exhibition on formation damage control, Lafayette, 20–21 Feb 2002Google Scholar
  25. Innes G, Morgan Q, Macarthur A, Green A (2005) Next generation completion systems. In: SPE/IADC middle east drilling technology conference & exhibition, paper SPE/IADC 97281, DubaiGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaiser TMV, Wilson S, Venning LA (2000) Inflow analysis and optimization of slotted liners (SPE 80145). In: SPE petroleum society of CIM international conference on horizontal well technology, Calgary, 6–8 Nov 2000Google Scholar
  27. Kaye BH (1993) Fractal dimensions in data space; new descriptors for fine particle systems. Part Part Syst Char 4(10):191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keck RG, Colbert JR, Hardham ED (2005) The application of flux-based sand control guidelines at the Na Kika deepwater fields. In: Paper SPE 95294-MS, SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Dallas, 9–12 Oct 2005Google Scholar
  29. Krumbein WC, Pettijohn FJ (1938) Manual of sedimentary petrography. Appleton-Century, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Lake LW, Clegg JD (2007) Petroleum engineering handbook – production operations engineering, vol IV. Society of Petroleum Engineers, RichardsonGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee CC, Darby M C, Popp TR (2001) Effective thru tubing gravel pack methods in Attaka field, SPE 72132. In: SPE Asia Pacific improved oil recovery conference, Kuala Lumpur, 8–9 Oct 2001Google Scholar
  32. Li Z, Yao D, Samuel GR (2007) Modeling expandable slotted tubulars, SPE 109674. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Anaheim, 11–14 Nov 2007Google Scholar
  33. Maly GP, Krueger RF (1971) Improper formation sampling leads to improper selection of gravel size. J Pet Technol, December, Vol. 23, No. 12, 1403-1408Google Scholar
  34. Manooti MA (1968) Statistical analysis of recent sand control work. In: API committee on sand control, API paper 926-13-GGoogle Scholar
  35. Markestad P, Christie O (1996) Selection of screen slot width to prevent plugging and sand production, SPE 31087. In: SPE formation damage control symposium, Lafayette, 14–15 Feb 1996Google Scholar
  36. Matanović D, Krištafor Z (1994) Sand washing with coiled tubing. Nafta 45(8), Zagreb, Croatian National Committee of World Petroleum Congresses and Croatian Academy of Science and Art, Croatian National Committee of World Petroleum Congresses and Croatian Academy of Science and Art, 389–396Google Scholar
  37. Metcalfe P, Whitelaw C (1999) The development of the first expandable sand screen. In: Offshore technology conference, paper OTC 11032, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  38. Mathiasen AM, Aastveit GL, Alteras E (2007) Successful installation of standalone sand screen in more than 2000 wells – the importance of screen selection process and fluid qualification, SPE 107539-MSGoogle Scholar
  39. Mondal S, Sharma MM, Chanpura RA, Parlar M, Ayoub A (2010) Numerical simulations of screen performance in standalone screen applications for sand control, SPE 134326. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Florence, 19–22 Sept 2010Google Scholar
  40. Murphey JR, Bila VJ, Totty K (1974) Sand consolidation system placed with water, SPE 5031. In: 49th annual fall meeting of the SPE of AIME, Dallas, 6–9 Oct 1974Google Scholar
  41. Ott WK (2008) Selection and Design Criteria for Sand Control Screens, SPE 120505-DL, SPE Distinguished Lecture and Presentation During 2007–2008Google Scholar
  42. Ott WK, Woods JD (2003) Modern sandface completion practices handbook, 1st edn. Gulf Publishing Company, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  43. Patton LD, Abbott WA (1979a) Well completion and workover: Part 2: Data requirements for completion planning. Petroleum Engineering International, May 1971Google Scholar
  44. Patton LD, Abbott WA (1979b) Well completion and workover: Part 3: Selecting the best well completion. Petroleum Engineering International, June 1979Google Scholar
  45. Perrin D (1999) Well completion and servicing. Institut Francais du Petrole Publications, ParisGoogle Scholar
  46. Penberthy WL Jr, Cope BJ (1980) Design and productivity of gravel-packed completions. J Pet Technol, October, Vol. 32, No. 10, 1679–1686Google Scholar
  47. Penberthy WL Jr, Echols EE (1993) Gravel placement in wells. J Pet Technol, July, 612, 613, Vol. 45, No. 7, 670–674Google Scholar
  48. Regulacion R, Seno A, Bn Safiin N, Bt Nik Khansani NZS (2011) Optimized stand-alone screen design for the “J” field, Malaysia, SPE 141461. In: SPE production and operations symposium, Oklahoma City, 27–29 Mar 2011Google Scholar
  49. Renpu W (2011) Advanced well completion engineering. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  50. Rideal GR, Storey J, Morris TR (2003) Pore size measurement of 3-dimensional woven filters using calibration microspheres, Whitehouse Scientific website, www.whitehousescientific.com
  51. Romero JL, Pizzarelli S, Mancini J (2002) Simultaneous stimulations and/or packing in multiple zones. Effective solutions. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, paper SPE 77437, San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  52. Saucier RJ (1972) Gravel pack design considerations, SPE 4030. In: 4th annual fall meeting SPE of AIME, San Antonio, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  53. Schwartz DH (1969) Successful sand control design for high rate oil and water wells. J Pet Technol, September, Vol. 21, No. 9, 1193–1198Google Scholar
  54. Shurtz GC, Breiner WG, Comeaux BG (1975) New thru tubing gravel pack technique, SPE 5660. In: 50th annual fall technical conference and exhibition, Dallas, 28 Sept–1 Oct 1975Google Scholar
  55. Sparlin DD, Copeland T (1972) Pressure packing with concentrated gravel slurry, SPE 4033Google Scholar
  56. Stein N (1969) Sand control method using a particulate pack with external and internal particle size distribution relationships. US Patent 3,434,540Google Scholar
  57. Suman GO Jr, Ellis RC, Snyder RE (1983) Sand control handbook, 2nd edn. Gulf Publishing, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  58. Tausch GH, Corley Jr. CB (1958) Sand exclusion in oil and gas wells. In: Spring meeting of the southern district division of production, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  59. Tendeka (2011) Web-based online screen manualGoogle Scholar
  60. Tiffin DL, Kong GE, Larese RE, Britt LK (1998) New criteria for gravel and screen selection for sand control, SPE 39437. In: SPE formation damage control conference, Lafayette, 18–19 Feb 1998Google Scholar
  61. Tiffin DL, King GE, Larese RE, Britt LK (2003) New criteria for gravel and screen selection for sand control, SPE 39437. In: SPE formation damage control conference, Lafayette, 18–19 Feb 2003Google Scholar
  62. Underdown DR, Dickerson RC, Larese RE, Britt LK (2001) The Nominal Sand Control Screen: A Critical Evaluation of Screen Performance. In paper SPE 75326-PA, SPE Drill Compl Vol. 16, No. 4, December 2001, 252–260Google Scholar
  63. Underdown DR, Dickerson RC, Vaughan W (1999) SPE 75326. Annual technical conference and exhibition, Houston, 3–6 Oct 1999Google Scholar
  64. Underdown DR, Sanclemente J (2002) SPE 74394. SPE international petroleum conference and exhibition, Villahermosa, 10–12 Feb 2002Google Scholar
  65. Van Buren M, Van Den Broek L (1999) Trial of an expandable sand screen to replace internal gravel packing. In: SPE/IADC middle east drilling technology conference, paper SPE/IADC 57565, Abu DhabiGoogle Scholar
  66. Weatherford (2003) Expendable technology: Alternative borehole liners (ABL®), overview and benefitsGoogle Scholar
  67. Wong GK, Fair PS, Bland KF, Sherwood RS (2003) Balancing Act: Gulf of Mexico sand control completions, peak rate versus risk of sand control failure, SPE 84497. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Denver, 5–8 Oct 2003Google Scholar
  68. Zwolle S, Davies DR (1983) Gravel packing sand quality – a quantitative study, SPE 10660. J Pet Technol, June, Vol. 35, No. 6, 1042–1050Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davorin Matanović
    • 1
  • Marin Čikeš
    • 1
  • Bojan Moslavac
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum Engineering Petroleum Engineering DepartmentUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations