MENAPS-11-12MENAPS 11 12A New Direction for Predicting Perforating Gun Performance

Andy Martin, Brenden Grove, Jeremy Harvey, Lang Zhan, David Atwooda d ood

A New Direction for Predicting Perforating Gun Performance

Wh P f t ?Why Perforate?Penetration ResearchPenetration ModelS ftSoftware

MENAPS-11-12

Why Perforate?

Perforating is a fundamental part of Perforating Connects Wellbore

to Virgin Reservoir

any well completion

It provides the connection between pwellbore and virgin reservoir rock

It provides the conduit for processes It provides the conduit for processes such as hydraulic fracturing or acid stimulation

Matrix Acid Treatment

stimulation

The success of a gravel pack completion strongly depends on completion strongly depends on perforating parameters Bad Perforations vs Good Perforations

MENAPS-11-12

Additional Benefits of Good Perforating Practices

Operational efficiency improves such as d d l i d d i ll

Scale Deposit

reduced cleanup periods during a well test or reduced N2 or completion fluid requirements to fire gunsrequirements to fire gunsDeep, clean perforations prolong the life of a well by reducing near-wellbore of a well by reducing near wellbore pressure dropHigh pressure drop leads to many well High pressure drop leads to many well problems: scale and aspheltenebuildup, fines migration or condensate b ki t i d ti ro

duct

ion

Good Perforations

banking, water coning or production below bubble point

Time

P Poor Perforations

MENAPS-11-12

Modeling A Perforated Completion – 4 Stages

Stage 1: Gathering Data

Stage 2: Perforation Tunnel Geometry Estimation

Stage 3: Perforation Tunnel ConditionStage 3: Perforation Tunnel Condition

Stage 4: Inflow Performance Estimation

MENAPS-11-12

How Do We Choose the Best?

Section 2 Penetration Tests in Section 2 Penetration Tests in Stressed Rock

Section 4 Flow Efficiency Tests in Section 4 Flow Efficiency Tests in Stressed Rock

A Model

MENAPS-11-12

Some History

Testing shaped charges in stressed rock is Testing shaped charges in stressed rock is not new: it was started in the 1950’s

We need to understand why the industry We need to understand why the industry moved away from systematic testing

Th t f lid ill l iThe next few slides will explain

MENAPS-11-12

A Move Towards Concrete in 1994 - SPE 27424

“Simple method predicts downhole shaped charge gun performance”at

ion

(in.)

2022

15 in. concrete

erea

pen

etra

1416

18

Correct fit of data?10 in. Berea10 5 in or 18 in concrete?

8 in. or 12.5 in. Berea?

n Se

ctio

n 2

B

810

12

10.5 in. or 18 in. concrete?

Line represents the average of the section 2 / section 1 ratios.43

4th

editi

on

24

6

t e sect o / sect o at osAverage ratio = 0.692

API RP43 4th edition Section 1 concrete penetration (in.)

API R

P4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

02

MENAPS-11-12

p ( )

Modern Shaped Charges Shoot Much Deeper in Concrete

40”

?Berea

40

?Berea

60”Concrete

MENAPS-11-12

Typical Penetration Work Flow - SPE 125020

Section 1 concrete Other rocksSection 1 concrete

7000 psi Berea

Other rocks(Thompson, Weeks, etc)

7000 psi Berea

Model Output(C t I d t M d l )(Current Industry Models)

Effective stress(Saucier, Weeks, Behrmann), etc

Casing, Fluid(Saucier, Regalbutto, etc)

MENAPS-11-12

Base case test of models - SPE 125020

3 3/8-in. gung

41.4 in. API concrete penetration

S d t f ti 6000 i UCSSandstone formation, 6000 psi UCS

3500 psi reservoir pressure

5000 psi overburden

MENAPS-11-12

Penetration Results - SPE 125020

35.3

?19 1

Actually14.4?

19.1 14.4

MENAPS-11-12

Penetration Model - Research

1950’s Today

More than 50 yearsNew facility opened 2004

1950 s Today

New facility opened 2004Accelerated testing started 2007started 2007Over 1000 tests conducted in stressed rockMost comprehensive study ever

MENAPS-11-12

New Penetration Model - SPE 127920Properties of Sandstones Used in This Study

Rock Type UCS (psi) Porosity (%)

Castlegate 1,060 to 2,100 27 to 29.2Berea Buff 3,800 21.6Berea Gray 5,870 to 9,310 19 to 21Torrey Buff 5,000 to 11,000 13 to 16

Weak to strong rocks tested

Torrey Buff 5,000 to 11,000 13 to 16Nugget 16,000 to 18,500 9.4 to 10.6Crab Orchard 20,000 to 30,000 6.6 to 8.7

Weak to strong rocks testedLargest ever range of stresses: 1000 to 20,000 psi (~70 to 1,400 bar)1000 to 20,000 psi ( 70 to 1,400 bar)Different families of charges usedFirst tests of capsule chargesFirst tests of capsule chargesRange of rock types

MENAPS-11-12

Apparent Target Strength: Ballistic Indicator Function

Rock target can be characterized by a Rock target can be characterized by a single functionFbi combines UCS porosity and stressFbi combines UCS, porosity and stressStress is a function of overburden stress, pore pressure and a ballistic , p ppore pressure coefficient (SPE 111778)Pore pressure has less influence in low porosityHigh UCS rocks have less dependence

ton stress

MENAPS-11-12

Penetration Trend for Different Strength Rocks

Increased rock UCS reduced Depth of PenetrationIncreased rock UCS reduced Depth of Penetration

UCS~1,600 psi 20.8 in

UCS~8,000 psi 16.5 in

Same Same effective stresseffective stress for for all shots (4,000psi)all shots (4,000psi)

UCS~16,000 psiall shots (4,000psi)all shots (4,000psi)

9 in

MENAPS-11-12

Penetration Trend for Different Stresses

Increased effective stress reduced Depth of PenetrationIncreased effective stress reduced Depth of Penetration

Effective Stress = 20,000 psi 8.5 in

Same Same UCS UCS for both for both shots (8,000psi)shots (8,000psi)

Effective Stress = 4,000 psi 16.5 in

MENAPS-11-12

Characteristic Penetration of a Shaped Charge

3 ½” DP charge

The charge can now be characterized by an exponential curve which uses two constants: DoPref and exponent α

MENAPS-11-12

Sandstone vs Carbonates

Austin Chalk:3000 psi, UCSIndiana Limestone: 7600 psi, UCSCarthage Marble: 20,000 psi, UCS

Similar function with different coefficients different coefficients

MENAPS-11-12

New penetration work flow - SPE 127920

New section 2 rock testNew section 2 rock test

3 rock/stress combinations3 rock/stress combinations(Ballistic Indicator Function, FBI) Characterize charge

(Harvey et al)

New Model

New penetration model(Harvey et al)

Casing, Fluid(Saucier, Regalbutto, etc)

MENAPS-11-12

Productivity from New Perforation Model

New Rock ChargeNew Rock Charge

DP Charge

Clean

Plugged

12%

Plugged

Karakas & Tariq model30%

Karakas & Tariq modelKc/K = 0.8, 0.18 in. of damageAdditional penetration increases effective wellbore radiusMore important for deep damageMore important for deep damageMore important for dirty perforationsPerfect combination is deepest penetration and clean tunnels

MENAPS-11-12

Productivity from New Software

Multiple Gun Strings

Multiple Casing Analysis

)( ,0 birefbi FFref eDoPDoP −= α

Analysis

Multiple Zone Analysis

MENAPS-11-12

Summary

C t t ti h ld t b d t di t Concrete penetration should not be used to predict perforation tunnel geometry (penetration) in stressed rocksShaped charges should be characterised in stressed rockWe propose a new section 2 test programWe propose a new section 2 test programOur current perforation analysis software includes our rock

d l model

MENAPS-11-12

A New Direction for Predicting Perforating Gun Performance

Wh P f t ?Why Perforate?Penetration ResearchPenetration ModelS ftSoftware Questions ?

MENAPS-11-12