PROJECT REPORT ON

WATER SHUT OFF IN PRODUCTION WELLS

Under the guidance of Sri R K ANAND CE(P)

Submitted by: 1) Satish kumar duggi AEE(P) 2) Gautam kumar AEE(P) 3) Rajiv Sharma AEE(P) 4) Nizamuddin khan AEE(P) 5) Fasil PM AEE(P) 6) Siddharth Priya Nath AEE(P)

ON 07.06.2013 ONGC GT(I) -2013

Page 1 of 18

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our supervisor R K Anand CE(P),IOGPT, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Panvel, Navi Mumbai for his perceptive suggestions and comments that helped us to remain motivated and enthused in completing this work. He has provided various facilities during the course of this project work. His infallible supervision and guidance has made this work a more rewarding experience for me. I would like to thanks to Mr. & other library assistant for cooperating during my project work. We would like to thank to all the employees and staff members who have contributed directly or indirectly in successful completion of our project work.

Page 2 of 18

INDEX CONTENTS
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Abstract Introduction Water sources Water problems Candidate well selection Diagnostic Methods Water control Technologies Post Job Evaluation & Success criteria

PAGE NO
4 5

Page 3 of 18

ABSTRACT

This project report draws attention towards water problems in oil & gas reservoirs due to multiple reasons. Selection of candidate wells for water problems and their proper diagnostics has been detailed out. Accordingly the proper water shut off job and treatment techniques has been explained to fix the water problem in the wells . A number of new technologies have been put to explain the development going on in the field of excessive water problem & their countermeasures.

Page 4 of 18

INTRODUCTION
Excessive water production causes major economic problems in terms of loss of oil production, as well as lifting, separating and disposing of large amounts of wastewaters. In addition, water production causes scale, corrosion and emulsion problems, major environmental problems.Therefore, every effort should be made to minimize excessive water production. Produced water can be reduced or avoided by using mechanical or chemical means. Mechanical means include drilling horizontal wells, placing a liner then perforating the target zone, or using downhole separation equipment, e.g., a hydrocyclone. Another problem that is caused by the presence of high permeability zones is differential pressure sticking, which occurs during drilling across porous and permeable formations. Differential pressure sticking occurs when the drill pipe becomes stuck in the filter cake on a permeable formation during drilling , mud and filtrate are lost into permeable zones when the mud hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore, Ph, is greater than the formation pore pressure, P. As the filtrate is lost, the solids in the mud are deposited on the formation face as filter cake. The characteristics of the filter cake depend on the type and amount of solids present in the mud. A mud with high native solids content leaves a thick sticky filter cake, while a mud with bentonite produces a slick thin filter cake. Selection of a specific water shut-off treatment depends on the sources of water, which include: coning, casing leaks, high permeability streaks, and natural fractures. Understanding reservoir characteristics and water movement in the reservoir are key factors that determine the success of these treatments.

Page 5 of 18

WATER SOURCES
Water is present in every oil field and is the most abundant fluid in the field.No operator wants to produce water, but some waters are better than others. When it comes to producing oil, a key issue is the distinction between sweep, good (or acceptable), and bad (or excess) water. Sweep waterSweep water comes from either an injection well or an active aquifer that is contributing to the sweeping of oil from the reservoir. The management of this water is a vital part of reservoir management and a determining factor in well productivity and the ultimate reserves. Good waterThis is water that is produced into the wellbore at a rate below WOR economic limit. It is an inevitable consequence of water flow through the reservoir, and it cannot be shut off without losing reserves. Good-water production occurs when the flow of oil and water is commingled through the formation matrix. The formation water flow is dictated by the natural mixing behaviour that gradually increases the WOR . Bad waterBad water can be defined as water that is produced into the wellbore and produces no oil or insufficient oil to pay for the cost of handling the waterwater that is produced above the WOR economic limit. In individual wells, the source of most bad-water problems can be classified as one of ten basic types. The classification of water problem types presented here is simplisticmany variations and combinations can occurbut it is useful for providing a common terminology.

Page 6 of 18

WATER PROBEMS
Casing, tubing or packer leaksLeaks through casing, tubing or packers allow water from non- oil-productive zones to enter the production string. Detection of problems and application of solutions are highly dependent on the well configuration. Basic production logs such as fluid density, temperature and spinner may be sufficient to diagnose these problems. In more complex wells, WFL Water Flow Logs or multiphase fluid logging such as the TPHL three-phase fluid holdup log can be valuable. Tools with electrical probes, such as the FlowView tool, can identify small amounts of water in the production flow. Solutions typically include squeezing shutoff fluids and mechanical shutoff using plugs, cement and packers. Patches can also be used. This problem type is a prime candidate for low-cost, inside-casing water shut- off technology. Channel flow behind casingFailed primary cementing can connect water-bearing zones to the pay zone (below middle). These channels allow water to flow behind casing in the annulus. A secondary cause is the creation of a void behind the casing as sand is produced. Temperature logs or oxygen-activation-based WFL logs can detect this water flow. The main solution is the use of shutoff fluids, which may be either high-strength squeeze cement, resin-based fluids placed in the annulus, or lower strength gel-based fluids placed in the formation to stop flow into the annulus. Placement is critical and typically is achieved with coiled tubing. Moving oil-water contactA uniform oil- water contact moving up into a perforated zone in a well during normal water-driven production can lead to unwanted water production (below right). This happens wherever there is very low vertical permeability. Since the flow area is large and the rate at which the contact rises is low, it can even occur at extremely low intrinsic vertical permeabilities (less than 0.01 mD). In wells with higher
Page 7 of 18

vertical permeability (Kv > 0.01 Kh), coning and other problems discussed below are more likely. In fact, this problem type could be considered a subset of coning, but the coning tendency is so low that near-wellbore shutoff is effective. Diagnosis cannot be based solely on known entry of water at the bottom of the well, since other problems also cause this behavior. In a vertical well, this problem can be solved easily by aban- doning the well from the bottom using a mechan- ical system such as a cement plug or bridge plug set on wireline. Retreatment is required if the OWC moves significantly past the top of the plug. Watered-out layer without crossflowA common problem with multilayer production occurs when a high-permeability zone with a flow barrier (such as a shale bed) above and below is watered out (above). In this case, the water source may be from an active aquifer or a waterflood injection well. The watered-out layer typically has the highest permeability. In the absence of reservoir crossflow, this problem is easily solved by the application of rigid, shutoff fluids or mechanical shutoff in either the injector or producer. Choosing between placement of a shutoff fluidtypically using coiled tubingor a mechanical shutoff system depends on knowing which interval is watered out. Effective selective fluids, discussed later, can be used in this case to avoid the cost of logging and selective place- ment. The absence of crossflow is dependent on the continuity of the permeability barrier. Horizontal wells that are completed in just one layer are not subject to this type of problem. Water problems in highly inclined wells completed in multiple layers can be treated in the same way as vertical wells. Coning or cuspingConing occurs in a vertical well when there is an OWC near perforations in a formation with a relatively high vertical permeability (below). The maximum rate at which oil can be produced without producing water through a cone, called the critical coning rate, is
Page 8 of 18

often too low to be economic. One approach, which is sometimes inappropriately proposed, is to place a layer of gel above the equilibrium OWC. However, this will rarely stop coning and requires a large volume of gel to significantly reduce the WOR. For example, to double the critical coning rate, an effective gel radius of at least 50 feet [15 m] typically is required. However, eco- nomically placing gel this deep into the formation is difficult. Smaller volume treatments usually result in rapid water re-breakthrough unless the gel fortuitously connects with shale streaks. A good alternative to gel placement is to drill one or more lateral drainholes near the top of the formation to take advantage of the greater dis- tance from the OWC and decreased drawdown, both of which reduce the coning effect. In horizontal wells, this problem may be referred to as duning or cusping. In such wells, it may be possible to at least retard cusping with near-wellbore shutoff that extends sufficiently up- and downhole as in the case of a rising OWC. Fractures or faults between injector and producerIn naturally fractured formations under waterflood, injection water can rapidly break through into producing wells (above). This is especially common when the fracture system is extensive or fissured and can be confirmed with the use of interwell tracers and pressure transient testing.6 Tracer logs also can be used to quantify the fracture volume, which is used for the treatment design. The injection of a flowing gel at the injector can reduce water production without adversely affecting oil production from the formation. When crosslinked flowing gels are used, they can be bullheaded since they have limited penetration in the matrix and so selectively flow in the fractures. Water shutoff is usually the best solution for this problem.
Page 9 of 18

Wells with severe fractures or faults often exhibit extreme loss of drilling fluids. If a conduc- tive fault and associated fractures are expected during drilling, pumping flowing gel into the well may help solve both the drilling problem and the subsequent water production and poor sweep problemsparticularly in formations with low matrix permeability. In horizontal wells, the same problem can exist when the well intersects one or more faults that are conductive or have associated conductive fractures. Fractures or faults from a water layer Water can be produced from fractures that intersect a deeper water zone . These fractures may be treated with a flowing gel; this is particularly successful where the fractures do not contribute to oil production. Treatment volumes must be large enough to shut off the fractures far away from the well. However, the design engineer is faced with three difficulties. First, the treatment volume is difficult to determine because the fracture volume is unknown. Second, the treatment may shut off oil-producing fractures; here, an overflush treat- ment maintains productivity near the wellbore. Third, if a flowing gel is used, it must be carefully tailored to resist flowback after the treatment. In cases of localized fractures, it may be appropriate to shut them off near the wellbore, especially if the well is cased and cemented. Similarly, a degradation in production is caused when hydraulic fractures penetrate a water layer. However, in such cases the problem and environ- ment are usually better understood and solutions, such as shutoff fluids, are easier to apply. In many carbonate reservoirs, the fractures are generally steep and tend to occur in clusters that are spaced at large distances from each other especially in tight dolomitic zones. Thus, the probability of these fractures intersecting a vertical wellbore is low. However, these fractures are often observed in horizontal wells where water production is often through
Page 10 of 18

conductive faults or fractures that intersect an aquifer. As discussed above, pumping flowing gel may help address this problem.

CANDIDATE WELL SELECTION

Recovery plotThe recovery plot is a semilog plot of WOR against cumulative oil production (above). The production trend can be extrapolated to the WOR economic limit to determine the oil production that will be achieved if no water-control action is taken. If the extrapolated production is approximately equal to the expected reserves for a well, then the well is producing acceptable water and no water control is needed. If this value is much less than the expected recoverable reserves,the well is producing unacceptable water and remedial action should be considered. Production history plotThis plot is a log-log plot of oil and water rates against time (below left). Good candidates for water control usually show an increase in water production and a decrease in oil production starting at about the same time. Decline-curve analysisThis is a semilog plot of oil production rate versus cumulative oil. A straight line can be expected for normal depletion. Any sudden change in the slope of the usual straight-line decline in oil production rate is a warning that excess water, as well as other problems, may be affecting normal production.

Page 11 of 18

DIAGNOSTIC METHODS
The key to water control is diagnosticsto identify the specific water problem at hand. Well diagnostics are used in three ways: to screen wells that are suitable candidates for water control to determine the water problem so that a suitable water-control method can be selected to locate the water entry point in the well so that a treatment can be correctly placed. A diagnostic log-log plot of WOR versus time can be used to help determine the specific problem type by making comparisons with known behavior patterns (left). Three basic signatures distinguish between different water breakthrough mechanisms: open flow through faults, fractures, or channel flow behind casing; edgewater flow or a moving OWC; and coning problems.7 Edgewater flow interpre- tations have been constructed from numerical simulation and field experience.8 The time- derivative of the WOR also can be used, but the uncertainty or noisy nature of field measure- ments generally limits its application. The inter- pretation engineer can learn to recognize the many variations in these profiles and minimize the problem of nonuniqueness, when combined with other data. The usefulness of WOR diagnostic plots in determining multilayer water encroachment is illustrated by an example in a field operated by a major North Sea operating company. A medium- size reservoir with a moderate-to-high energy shoreface structure had been heavily bioturbated, giving rise to substantial permeability variations (next page, top). No significant shale barriers were present, and the 360-ft [110-m] thick reservoir from X590 to X950 ft [X180 to X290 m] gently dipped into an aquifer. The edges of the reservoir were bounded by sealing faults and
Page 12 of 18

truncated by an unconformity. A vertical well was perforated across 165 ft [50 m] in the middle of this unit. No OWC or gas-oil contacts (GOC) were present in the reservoir. The WOR-diagnostic plot generated from monthly well-test data shows the effect of the per- meability variation in the reservoir strata (next page, bottom). The plot illustrates watering-out of high-permeability layers, which contribute to crossflow in the reservoir. The ratio of break- through times (1800:2400:2800) gives an indication of the permeability ratios in these layers. The cumulative oil produced and the relative perme- ability-height products of the layers might be used to estimate the remaining reserves in the lower permeability parts of the formation.

Page 13 of 18

Water-Control Technologies
Each problem type has solution options that range from the simple and relatively inexpensive mechanical and chemical solutions, to the more complex and expensive reworked completion solutions. Multiple watercontrol problems are common, and often a combination of solutions may be required. Today, in addition to the traditional solutions described above, there are new, innovative and cost-effective solutions for watercontrol problems. Mechanical solutionsIn many near- wellbore problems, such as casing leaks, flow behind casing, rising bottom water and watered- out layers without crossflow, mechanical or inflatable plugs are often the solution of choice. The PosiSet mechanical plugback tool can be deployed on coiled tubing or wireline, and is a field-proven technology that ensures reliable wellbore shutoff in cased- and openhole environments (right). When the wellbore must be kept open to levels deeper than the point of water entry, a through-tubing patch may be the answer. For example, a new coiled tubing- or wireline- deployed, inside-casing patch called the PatchFlex sleeve has been used successfully in many appli- cations worldwide (far right). It is particularly well suited to through-tubing water or gas shutoff, injection-profile modifications and zonal isolation. The inflatable sleeves are custom-built to match the length of the perforated intervals and can withstand wellbore crossflow pressures. Once set, the sleeve becomes a composite liner inside the casing that is millable using through-tubing tech- niques if a subsequent squeeze operation is desired, or it can be reperforated later to allow reentry to the zones. The only disadvantage of the composite liner is a reduction of less than 1 in. [2.5 cm] in the wellbore diameter. However, other mechanical patch remedies take up even more of the available casing inner diameter.
Page 14 of 18

Chemical solutionsChemical treatments require accurate fluid placement. Coiled tubing with inflatable packers can help place most treat- ment fluids in the target zone without risk to oil zones. Coiled tubing dual injection is a process of pumping protective fluid down the coiled tubing to the casing annulus and delivering the treat- ment fluid through the coiled tubing (right). SqueezeCRETE cement is another key weapon in the armory of water-control solutions.17 Its low fluid loss and capability to penetrate microfractures narrower than 160 microns make it ideal for remedial treatment of tubing leaks caused by flow behind pipe. Once set, this cement shows high compressive strength, low permeability and high resistance to chemical attack. SqueezeCRETE treatment is often used with common cement for shutting off perfora- tions when the problem is watered-out layers, or rising bottom water or OWCs. Other applications include sealing gravel packs, casing leaks or channels behind casing. Rigid gels are highly effective for near- wellbore shutoff of excess water (right). Unlike cement, gels can be squeezed into the target for- mation to give complete shutoff of that zone or to reach shale barriers. They have an operational advantage over cement treatments because they can be jetted rather than drilled out of the well- bore. Typically based on crosslinked polymers, products like MaraSEAL and OrganoSEAL-R systems can be easily mixed and have a long working life. They can be bullheaded into the formation to treat specific water problems such as flow behind casing and watered-out layers with- out crossflow, or selectively placed in the water zone using coiled tubing and a packer.18 Another solution is a flowing gel that can be injected into small faults or fractures, but only penetrates formations with permeabilities greater than 5 darcies. Large volumes (1000 to 10,000 bbl) [159 to 1589 m3] of
Page 15 of 18

these inexpensive fluids often successfully shut off extensive fracture systems surrounding waterflood injector or producing wells.19 Like rigid gels, products such as Marcit and OrganoSEAL-F systems are cross-linked poly- mers that are simple to mix, have a long (up to three days) working time before becoming rigid, and can be pumped through completion screens. Smart or selective fluids in the form of poly- mers and surfactants are being developed for for- mation matrix treatments near the wellbore. These treatments, called relative permeability modifiers, produce a permanent gel-like material to stop flow in water layers, but retain fluid behaviour in oil layers to allow production to continue.

Page 16 of 18

POST JOB EVALUATION

Justification of a treatment in any well is based on the value of the increased hydrocarbon production expected. The key word here isexpected, which indicates a degree of uncertainty in the analysis. Some water-control treatments can guarantee substantial production increase. In such circumstances, the primary element of uncertainty is the job success itself. When the incremental production is relatively small (or was based on several assumptions) not only does job-risk come into play, but also the prediction itself becomes a key risk. Therefore, the value of a water- control treatment to the operator needs to be quantified. An analysis incorporating the multifaceted components of risk can be undertaken using the methods of quantitative risk analysis.
Status Oil Production Increases Technical Success Unchanged Reduces Increases Decrease Unchanged Water Production Unchanged

Sustained increase Economic Success equivalent to 10 times the cost of job

Economic & Technical Success

Sustained increase equivalent to 10 times the cost of job Decrease

Page 17 of 18

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. www.wikipedia.org 2. www.petroone.org 3.

Page 18 of 18