SPE-172549-MS

Tandem ESP-Packer Dumpflood Completion – A Successful Alternative to

Conventional Encapsulated ESP systems – Field Case Study
Nasser Al-Hajeri and Elred Anthony, KOC; Ghazi A-Sharhan and Ajay Jha, Schlumberger

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Manama, Bahrain, 8 –11 March 2015.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Dumpflooding from a strong Aquifer to support pressure to another depletion-drive reservoir is not new
to the oil industry, neither to the region. In cases where the natural Aquifer pressure is insufficient to
deliver adequate volumes to meet pressure support requirements, or the Injectivity of the target reservoir
is relatively low, artificial lift is required. This was the case in the North Kuwait Asset where Injectivity
was poor owing to the relatively low natural fracture density of the Carbonate reservoir being flooded.
Since the conventional encapsulated (POD) systems required one (1) seal-bore packer, one (1)
encapsulated ESP system, and one (1) ESP-packer, it was decided to test an alternate and simpler system
that required only two (2) ESP packers that would achieve the same result.
Deployment of this new tandem-ESP-packer system proved less complex and required less rig time
than the encapsulated ESP system. Both packers were set simultaneously in one operation with the ESP
function test to surface-pit giving excellent results. After opening the SSD’s, the ESP operating param-
eters, measured at surface, indicated optimum pump performance at expected injection rates.
The Tandem-ESP-Packer Dumpflood completion system provides fewer sealing interfaces than the
conventional encapsulated ESP system, and therefore fewer opportunities for leaks. Additionally, it
affords a very simple one-trip system for less complex deployment, and retrieval, when necessary. This
alternate system also provides easily-deployed, immediate pressure support in areas of the reservoir/field
while awaiting the installation and commissioning of major surface Injection facilities.
Introduction
Sabiriyah Mauddud (SAMA) is a major hydrocarbon bearing formation in Sabiriyah field of North Kuwait
field. It is the largest North Kuwait reservoir in terms of OOIP and produces 40% of the Sabiriyah oil
production. It is a carbonate reservoir that was discovered at an undersaturated condition, thus the drive
mechanism is almost a pure depletion drive.
The initial pressure in SAMA reservoir was 3,700 psia at -7,300 ft sub-sea datum. The reservoir
temperature is 173° F. the bubble point pressure of the crude in the Mauddud reservoir is 1750 psi.
Mauddud oil API gravity is ranging between 25- 30 degree.
The SAMA reservoir is currently water flooded to provide pressure support since late 2000. The
original strategy in the SAMA reservoir was to use the Inverted 9-spot pattern injection in the Crestal /
2 SPE-172549-MS

Mid-Flank regions. Despite the initiation of Phase-1 water injection, the instantaneous VRR’s for most
patterns were below 1.0, significantly so for several patterns, which caused the overall reservoir pressure
to plummet. In a few areas, reservoir pressures reached just above bubble point pressure.
However, in certain areas in SAMA, natural flow wells have been converted to ESP production,
significantly increasing fluid extraction rates and an acceleration of reservoir pressure decline due to the
absence of simultaneous reservoir pressure support. This has brought field management to untenable
position where ESP’s are tripping, and ultimately failing prematurely due to subsurface conditions
deteriorating much faster than originally anticipated. The SAMA reservoir having a solution gas drive
mechanism, is particular adversely effected by this accelerated depletion.
In order to avoid closing in oil production, a task force was commissioned to find and implement
innovative ways to accelerate water injection in those critically depleted areas until the phase-2 injection
facility was eventually commissioned. One of the methods employed was Dump flooding.
Reservoir characteristics & performance
The Mauddud reservoir is a major oil bearing carbonate horizon present in the Raudhatain (RA) and
Sabriyah (SA) fields located in North Kuwait. The geological structure of the SAMA reservoir is a faulted
dome anticline. It is a limestone reservoir with 350-400 ft gross thickness, subdivided into several
sub-layers (Ma-A – Ma-J) all in pressure communication but locally separated by weak to moderate
strength layered baffles. The layers under major exploitation are in the upper half of the gross interval. The
porosities range from 0.16 to 0.26 and permeabilities from 30 to 70 md. In-situ oil quality varies from an
upper lighter crude (average API 26o), with PVT properties that deteriorate with increasing depth towards
the flank of the dome structure. Effective reservoir management leading to pattern balancing and
maximizing the overall full field recovery are the key areas considered at present. As far as water flood
conformance is concerned, active work is ongoing to inject in the lower layers along the dome periphery,
and produce from upper layers, using gravity displacement to delay the water breakthrough. Also,
aggressive drilling of horizontal injectors and producers is in the ongoing development plan.
Production performance
Production from the SAMA reservoir is predominantly influenced by matrix flow. The current level of
production is within the range of 160-170 MBOPD. An aggressive infill producer campaign was
conducted in 2010 to dove-tail with the commissioning of the Phase-II Sea Water injection facility. But
due to the excessive delays in pump and construction delivery, these infill producers accelerated the global
reservoir decline beyond prediction, thereby resulting in the frequent tripping of ESP’s and associated
production loss and increased lifting costs. This unplanned pressure decline, while awaiting Injection
commissioning, required urgent remedial action without resorting to cutting back on production.
Initial Dumpflood Application (Natural)
A Natural Dumpflood was piloted as a temporary measure to initiate pressure support in the SAMA
reservoir in 2011 while awaiting the start-up of the surface injection facility. This dumpflood was
executed by facilitating an inter-reservoir cross-flow between a high-pressured strong salt-water Aquifer
into the depleted SAMA reservoir by natural pressure difference, thereby utilizing the same wellbore for
both source water and target injection, thus eliminating the surface injection infrastructure.
5
The first candidate for Natural Dumpflood application was drilled and completed with 98⬙ casing
through the SAMA reservoir down to the deeper LB Aquifer formation for reservoir delineation of the
elsewhere oil-bearing LB formation. This completion facilitated access to the strong aquifer by rigless
thru-tubing perforating. This well is located at the base of the dome structure where the reservoir rock
quality is the poorest.
In this pilot well, at total of 62 ft was perforated across the two most depleted layers (Ma-D & E) in
the SAMA reservoir at 12 spf using 7’’ hollow steel carriers. Though the individual layer permeabilities
and pressures are comparable, it is expected that the first interval perforated (lower interval) will have less
SPE-172549-MS 3

perforation damage, hence the higher cross-flow rate. The 4½2⬙ Injection string was then run with
injection packer set above uppermost injection interval, and the LB aquifer subsequently perforated using
1
28⬙ spiral thru-tubing gun.
The first PLT survey was conducted across both perforated intervals showing that only 213 bpd
cross-flowed from the normally-pressured Aquifer (LB) to SAMA (⬎90% into the lower MaE layer).
Subsequently, a pre-Acid-Stim injectivity test yielded 1.5 bpm (2160 bpd) with 2300 psi ⌬P cross the
SAMA intervals. The SAMA interval was Acid stimulated with 150 bbl 15% HCL at 1.0 bpm (1440 bpd)
with 2500 psi ⌬P cross the SAMA intervals. After that, Post-Acid Stim injectivity yielded 6 bpm (8640
bpd) with 2300 psi ⌬P cross the SAMA intervals. Another PLT survey was run after the stimulation and
found no appreciable improvement, only 238 bpd (0.16 bpm) cross-flowed from LB to SAMA at 900 psi
⌬P cross the MA intervals. A third PLT survey was conducted 19 months afterward, and showed only 268
bpd cross-flow rates, confirming extremely low natural reservoir injectivity. In order to achieve the
required injection rates, an ESP-Assisted Dumpflood (ESPAD) system was recommended.
Completion Schematic
This design simply takes source LB formation water, proven compatible with the target reservoir fluids,
and injects it into the SAMA reservoir via an ESP at the pre-determined rate for optimum pressure
support. The lower packer provides a seal between the Source LB reservoir and the target SAMA
reservoir, and the upper packer isolates the entire casing to surface from the continuous contact of the
highly saline LB formation water.

Figure 1—Tandem ESP-Packer Dumpflood Completion

Design Considerations
● Compatibility of Reservoir Fluids (Emulsion and core tests conducted showed no incompatibility
between LB and SAMA reservoir fluids and rock)
● Source Aquifer deliverability (perforated interval selected gave LB aquifer an exceedingly higher
productivity than SAMA Injectivity)
● Limit deployment complexity (Conventional ESP unit and ESP packers sufficient)
● Equipment availability (conventional equipment reduces delivery schedules)
● Solids concentration in flow stream (aquifer is very consolidated coarse-grained sandstone with
history of negligible fines production)
● Minimization of potential leakage surfaces (only four sealing surfaces, two at each ESP packer-
instead of five)
4 SPE-172549-MS

● System cost (conventional ESP and Completion equipment will eliminate specialty, high-value
equipment)

System Challenges
● Both ESP packers to be unset simultaneously (Packer unsetting shear value to be reduced to
minimum)
● High-grade ESP & tubular metallurgy required due to very saline flow stream
● Direct flow measurement (Daily flow rates estimated from ESP data & pump curves)

Alternative Dumpflood Designs

Two possible ESP completions were considered for this well:
1. Encapsulated ESP system, and
2. Tandem Packer ESP system
The two below figures showed the design completion details for the both ways.
SPE-172549-MS 5

Figure 2—Encapsulated ESP System

6 SPE-172549-MS

Figure 3—Tandem ESP Packer system

SPE-172549-MS 7

System Comparison
Completion deployment, post-installation rate and pressure surveillance, system costs, and possible
leakage points were compared between the two systems as summarized in the table below:

Table-1—
Factors considered Encapsulated ESP system Tandem Packer ESP system

Ease of Deployment 2-trip deployment 1-trip deployment

Post-Installation Surveillance PLT for rates PLT for rates
ESP Sensors for Pressures ESP Sensors for Pressures
Cost $1.3 $1
Possible leakage points 5 4

Conclusions
● The Tandem-ESP system reduces rig time by employing a 1-trip system rather than
a 2-trip system required by the Encapsulated ESP system
● Post-installation Surveillance techniques are similar for both systems
● There are more points which can develop leaks in the system in the Encapsulated
ESP system than in the Tandem-ESP system
● Overall cost of the Encapsulated ESP system exceeds the Tandem-ESP system by
approximately 30%

References
1. SPE– 68721: Umm Gudair Dumpflood Pilot Project – R. Quttainah, J. Al-Hunaif, Kuwait Oil
Company
2. SPE-164661: Overcoming the Typical Operational Problems & Cost of Water Injection Using
Dumpflooding – Rami Helaly et alet al., Agiba Petroleum Company
3. SPE-97624: Umm Gudair Production Plateau Extension – R. Quttainah et alet al., Kuwait Oil
Company