.

,..

WX5SP; c!?e!m!e!.! E!?gr!mrs

SPE 27092 Coiled-Tubing Completion Procedure Reduces Cost and Time for Hydraulically Fractured Wells
D.A. Harms, Mobil E&P U.S. Inc. SPE Member
Copyright 1994, SocMy of Petroleum Engineers, Inc. Regional Meeting bald in Long Seach, CaffiOrnfa, U.S.A., 22-25 March 1~.

This peper wee prepsred for presentation

at the Western

This paper wee eeleofed for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information corrtitnad In an ebstrsct submtied by the author(e). Contente of the paper. se presented, heve not been reviewed by the society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(a), The material, se presented, doea not neceaserily reffect ,.. . e- ;.., . D ,,A ,,~ Fnoi_rs. em s@ecf to pubfiiation review by Edhorial COmmlffWa of the %Oiefy its ~ffi=, or ~m~m, papem Wa~nted at SPE ~~nga any pmbori m me WCWIY1 , e.. -e-... -..=... . ,,,. ._...-m ,,,.. .ti * ~n~, The ~r~ eh~~ oon~in ~nspicuous acknowledgment of Petroleum Engineers. Parmiseiin to COPYis restricted to an ah-t of not mcfe thm w me. IIIIWULU~WB- -J . .. . S .U. S.A.,Telex 1SS24S SPEUT. of where and by whom the pew is presented. Wrne Librtisn! SpE, p.o. Sox m, ~mhwd~n, TX 7~1

ABSIRACT A unique completion procedure has been developed to reduce the cost and time to hydraulically fracture welis. In the procedure, coiled tubing is used to replace conventional tubing in most of the operations. This procedure is made possible by a wellhead design that enhances safety and simplifies switching from one operation to the next. Hydrauiic fracturing coats comprise the majority of the total cost for new diatomite welia. Muitiple stimulations can be compieted in a single day by using coiled tubing to cleanout or piace sand plugs which are used to isolate the interval between hydraulic fracture perforated stimulations. This allows significant savings to be realized by fuiiy utiiizing the service companys entire minimum daiiy charge. The coiled tubing also functions as a dead string during fracture stimulations which allows real time monitoring of downhole fracturing pressures. The new wellhead incorporates two unique ideas: 1) a hammer union tree cap which replaces the conventional tlangeii tree *p. ~=~wm! te ~he ~r~ ~p iS a blast joint that provides protection from sand erosion when using coiied tubing as the dead string. The wellhead design enables the tree cap (with attached blast joint) to be

quickiy and easily exchanged with a fullbore lubricator; 2) a full opening gate valve located between the casinghead and the fracture wellhead. The valve is a safety device that ailows any part of the wellhead to be removed while ensuring a completely controlled condition.

INTRODUCTION The coiled tubing completion procedure was developed for diatomite welia at Mobils Lost Hills field. The field is located on the southeast nose of the Lost Hilis Anticiine in the San Joaquin Basin (Kern County, Caiifomia). The reservoir consists of 600 to 800 ft of three m~or iithologies: interbedded diatomite, diatomaceous shale and diatomaceous silt. These three iithologies have different mechanical properties that greatly affect their abiiity to fracture. Attempting to fracture stimuiate intervais greater then 200 has proven ineffective in the past due to the partial vertical coverage of the intervai. Therefore muitiple fracture stimulations are required to effectively deplete the reservoir. Hydrauiic fracture completions comprise approximately 65% of the total weil cost. A procedure to reduce the cost and make new well economics more attractive was required to continue the development of the fieid. This paper outlines anew procedure that effectively reduces the cost and time required to complete the weiis.

References and illustrations at end of Paper 447

Coiled Tubing Completion Procedure Reduces Cost and Time for Hydraulically Fractured Wells

SPE 27892

COi+iiTmTIaWL

mommwu

COILED TUBING PROCEDURE The conventional completion procedure was altered in three main areas during the 1993 progmm: 1) coiled tubing replaced the conventional tubing for most of the opemtions. The coiled tubing could be run in and out of the wellbore more quickly than conventional tubing and did not require a snubbing assist unit if pressure was encountered. The coiled tubing was used as the dead string when fracture stimulating, and was used in cleaning out or placing sand plugs between perfomted intervals. 2) a unique wellhead was deveioped to faetiimte s-witckdng from one opemtion to the next and to accommodate a hlass joht to protect the coiled tubing from erosion. 3) use of sand plugs instead of a retrievable bridge plugs to isolate intervals between fracture stimulations. A summary of the coiled tubing procedure is outlined in A&se ~. uaule The new procedure enhances safety by eliminating the requirement for a snubbing assist unit. The crossover depth from snubbing to stripping (depth where the weight of the tubing is greater then the upward force due to pressure) is less than the depth of the sand plug. Therefore, the tubing can be run in the hole without weii pressure to the crossover depth. Next, the tubing can be stripped in the hole while circulating sand out of the wellbore. The tubing used to circulate out sand becomes the production string. Once the sand is circulated out, the tubing is landed, and the producing tree installed. The one way circulating valve installed in the tubing is then sheared out and the well turned over to production. A second Pareto diagram (see fig. 2) was created to identify the coat drivers when the coiled tubing completion procedure is used. Again, the fmcture service company accounts for the mqjority of the charges. However, with the new procedure, only 20% of the total completion cost was due to the hydrati:c fmcture pump charges, which results in a 33% reductjon (compared to 30% with the conventional procedure). The sand expense, however, is the most significant cost of the coiled tubing completion procedure. (Sand is 28% of the total@ compared to 18% using the coiiveiitkmd procetkre.) Again, as with the conventional procedure, increasing or decreasing the cost of the non-fmcture company services and equipment does not have a noticeable effect on the ovemll completion costs. Therefore, the cost of a coiled

To identify major cost drivers for the conventional completion procedure, 1992 completion charges were tabulated on a Pareto diagram (see fig. 1). As expected, the fracture stimulation costs accounted for most of the total completion cost. The sum of the six fracture service company expenses comprised 73% of the total completion cost during 1992.
Iimrth.r rcwim.y that of the six fracture service K, ..-. .- ..-, ~D&@ed company categories, hydraulic fracture pump charges were the most significant. These charges accounted for 30$10of the total. The cost of the saiid mid the frac gel . were ZiSO i%CO@W&Xi having a rn.~or effect on X completion costs resulting in 18% and 17% of the expenses respectively.

Increasing or decreasing the cost of the other company services (workover rig, perforating etc.) has little effect on the overall completion cost. The Pareto diagram corroborates this by showing that none of the non-fracture services or equipment account for more than 10% of the overaii cost. In addition to having high stimulation costs, considerable time was required to complete the well using the conventional procedure. Time intensive operations included: running in and out of the hole with the tubing, moving and pressure testing the bridge plug, and switching the wellhead cotilguration in preparation for fracturing. An overview of the conventional procedure is outlined in table 1. Using this procedure, only one perforated interval could be fmctured per day. Typical Mobil Lost Hills fmcture stimulations require pump times between 1 hour and 1.5 hours per perforated intervaL However, since the service company charges a four hour minimum for their pumping equipment, by performing otdy one fmcture stimulation per day, 65% to 75% of the pump expenses incurred were not used. Additionally, a snubbing assist unit was required to work on these wells since they would flow after being fmcture stimulated. An average of 2 days was required when using the snubbing assist unit to remove the bridge plug and run a production string. W]th the conventional completion, a well with 5 perfomted intervals requires 8 days of opemtions prior to placing the well on production.

448

SPE 27892

D. A. fiIlllS

overall completion costs. Therefore, the cost of a coiled tubing unit over a conventional w-orimvei fig dk! not add an appreciable amount to the total cost.

fracturing, the tubing is pulled slowly up the hole at the end of the jQb. A blast joint is used as a sleeve in the wellhead to prevent sand from eroding the coiled tubing. The thickness of the coiled tubing is monitored before and after fracturing. No incremental metal loss has been detected on the coiled tubing when it was used as the dead string. However, the blast joint has shown noticeable wear at the point of sand entry into the wellhead. Without the blast joint such ~ro~ion ~ouid have possibly parted the coiled tubing.

COILED TUBING Ftw Sandcleammt After fracture stimulating, the 1.5 coiled tubing unit is . . ..# c = The ~iti~fi w +ha used primarily to clean out sand. sand plugs is critical since sufllcient sand is required to ko!a& the pressure resii!ting from previously stimulated intervals. However, the sand can not cover the next interval to be perforated. The coiled tubing provides a method for cleaning out the sand to the desired depth 1 -c h.vo hem e~cQunteA in lifting accuratdy, No prcb.a... ..-------the frac sand using the 1.5 coiled tubing in 7 casing. Gelled KC] water (Marsh Funnel Vkcosity of 35 to 40 sec.) is used as the circulating fluid. A circuiting pump wfiii shale shaker is employed to retain as much of the gelled water for m-use as possible. The time to circulate the sand out of the well and pull the coiled tubing averages two hours. In addition, several improvements were made in the 1993 project to help the frac sand settle faster in the wellbore: 1) the crosslinking agent was cut out of the gelled fluid during the last two minutes of the fracture stimulation. (The sand laden gelled fluid was pumped into the wellbore and the near wellbore area as a linear fluid.) 2) KCI water was pumped as a flush instead of gelled fluid. The difference in sand settling is significant. For example, on the wells pumped with all crosslinked gelled fluid and flushed with gelled fluid, over 3 hours is required for the sand to settle. Tailing in with a linear gelled fluid and a KC1 water flush allows the sand to settle in 30 minutes. On occasion, the sand plug ieft in the weiiimre after completing a fracture stimulation was not of suftlcient ~e~g~~ tO pFOVMe pressure integrity. In these cases sand can be pumped dQwnthe coiled tubing to provide a larger sand plug. The sand is pumped at low concentrations (1 to 2 lb./gaL) using KCI water. No bridghg of sand in the . coiied tubing has *ii experwimi. As ADead Strhqg The coiled tubing is also employed as a dead string when fracture stimulating. The coiled tubing, run in the hole just above the perforated interval, is used to monitor bottom hole pressure during the stimulation. To prevent excess sand from falling around the coiled tubing after

A unique wellhead was designed to improve the eftlciency of the coiled tubing completion procedure (see fig. 3). Two features have been combinwi to ensure the eom@etimi wellhead is secure and accessible. A tree cap was devised ti,tii an =ttt&d sieve tQ protect the coiled tubing from sand and a full opening master valve has been employed With a total height of 5.5 the to enhance safety. wellhead allows service company personnel to switch the tree cap with a lubricator while standing at ground level. The most diathwtive part of the completion wellhead is the hammer union tree cap (see fig. 4). It has been designed to allow connection of the coiled tubing blow out prevention equipment (BOPE) to the top of the cap. A blast joint can then be threaded into the bottom. Since the blast joint has to be removed prior to conducting intermediate operations (logging, perforating etc.), attaching the tree cap to the coiled tubing BOPE, allows both to be treated as an integral unit. This enables the tree cap and blast joint to be quickly removed when placing a lubricator on the completion wellhead. A hammer union connection was designed to attach the tree cap go ~iie w~ilii=d, The tree cap connection matched the perforating companys lubricator connection. With this design, the tree cap/ coiled tubing BOPE equipment and a lubricator can be exchanged hi apprdmatciy 15 minutes. In order to remove the tree cap and lubricator under controlled conditions, the well pressure has to be isciated. A master valve has been incorporated between the casing head and the fracture stimulation wellhead for this purpose. The valve is a full opening gate valve with the internal diameter sized to match the internal dhuneter of the production casing. This ensures that there are no restrictions for equipment entering the well.

449

Coiled Tubing Completion Procedure Reduces Cost and Time for Hydraulically Fractured Wells

SPE 27892

During the 1993 completion project, we discovered that the master valve seats require reconditioning after 5 to 6 million pounds of sand (typically 3 to 4 wells) have been pumped through it. In the latter stages of the project, two completion wellheads (master valve and frac valve) are employed. The inactive completion wellhead can be reconditioned and installed on the next well to be Cmnp:eted.

conventional and the 1993 coiled tubing completion procedures. Both in the conventional procedure and the coiled tubing procedure, fracture service company charges account for the majority of the costs. However, the coiled tubing procedure reduces the completion costs by an average of $60M. Fully using the 4 hour minimum charged for the hydraulic pumps accounts for $35M (or EOOZ.\ +k. v... .f WARM cd rdmdinn .J7 W J u. .. w. . .-.... . Additional savings were realized by reducing the rental time, not using bridge plugs, and eliminating the snubbing assist unit. When compared to the average completion costs for Lost Hills wells in the past five years (see fig. 5), the new completion procedure lowers costs by 21%.

REsuLrs The coiled tubing has worked well in circulating sand out of the wellbore. The time required to circulate and pull out of the hole with the coiled tubing averages two hours. This allows a fracture stimulation treatment to be performed every three hours. Additionally, sand plugs can be safely placed through coiled tubing using KCI water and low sand concentrations (1 lb./gal. to 2 lb./gaL). No sand bridging has been observed in the coiled tubing. Coiled tubing has been used successfully as a dead string to monitor the bottom hole pressure during fracture stimulations. No incremental metal loss has been detected on the coiled tubing. However, the sleeve around the coiled tubing has exhibited noticeable wear at the point of --J ..-4-.y :..4...qL. ...mIIL . wk. cApUluuusG .. ...AIAI. .1-.,. h.. Sauu C1lL1 lllLU UK w cull-u. s llC v--r G u worked well to prevent the coiled tubing from erosion and possible parting. The new wellhead has reduced the time required for switching from one operation to the next. An average of 15 minutes were required to switch out the coiled tubing BOPE to a lubricator and vice versa. The seats in the master valve have required redressing after completing three to four wells. Similar results have been observed
with thm vmlvx ... fhm nnderl fmdmw - h-d. .. . . . . . . . . . . - in . ... . ...&J. --------. It ~St~g~~f~~~

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to acknowledge the technical -- ..,. assistance of J. Ryan, Halliburton Energy Services and i?. Litzel, Dowell Schhnnberger, and the significant contribution of W. Johnson, Mobil Exploration and Producing U.S. Inc. in implementing the procedure. The author also wishes to thank Mobil Exploration & Producing U.S. Inc. for granting permisdon to publish th:. --bm pp. .

REFERENCES

1.

recommended that on large projects, two wellheads be used alternately. One wellhead could be redressed while the other is being used. With the coiled tubing procedure, a well with 5 fracture stimulated intervals can be placed on production in 4 days. This has resulted in a 50% reduction in completion time when compared to conventional methods. During 1993 an average of 3 intervals were fracture stimulated per day. Although it was necessary to increase the hours worked per day from 10 to 12, use of the 4 hour minimum service company pump charge was maximized. Table 3 compares the average costs for both the 1992

Coats, E. A., and Johnson, K. J.: Realed-Tubing Technology Accelerates Coalbed Methane Production in the Black Warnor Basin paper SPE 23697, nresented at the Production ~_--- Operations Symposium of the Society of Petroleum Engineem, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, April 7-10, 1991.

2.

Fast, R. E., Murer, A. S., and Timmer, R. S.: Description and Analysis of Cored Hydratilc Fractures, Lost Hills Field, Kern County California paper SPE 24853, presented at the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, Washington , D.C., October 4-7, 1992.

Figure 1. 40 --

Pareto chart identifying conventional

completion
.- ..

cost drivers.
1

100

Frac Company Charges Non-Frac Company Charges

Step 1. Step 2. Step 3. Step 4. Step 5. Step ~~q Step Step 6. 7 8. 9.

Move in production rig, install necessary equipment. Set retrievable bridge plug (RBP) below bottom stage (with tubing) . Perforate interval to be fracture stimulated. Run tubing in hole. Fracture stimulate down tubing/casing annulus (with tubing used to monitor bottom hole pressure) . Force ciose fracture with limited floiiback. cleanQut sand with tubing. Retrieve, reset RBP above perforated interval and pressure test. Pull out of hole with tubing.

Repeat steps 3 through 9 for each interval to be stimulated. seep 10, Move in snubbing assist unit, install necessary equipment. Step 11. Snub RBP out of hole and snub/strip in production string

451

Table 2.

Coiled tubing completion procedure outline.

Step Step Step Step

1. 2. 3. 4.

Step 5. Step 6. Step 7.

Move in coiled tubing unit, install necessary equipment. Perforate interval to be fracture stimulated. Run coiled tubing in hole. Fracture stimulate down tubing/casing annulus (with coiled tubing used to monitor bottom hole pressure) . Force close fracture with limited flowback and allow time for sand to settle. Clean out sand to bottom of next perforated interval, or place sand through coiled tubing if necessary. Pull coiled tubing out of hole.

Repeat steps 2 through 7 for each stage. Step 8. Rig down coiied tubing unit and equipment. Step 9. Move in production rig, install necessary equipment. Step 10. Run conventional tubing in hole, circulate out sand to total depth. Step 11. Land production string.

Figure 2.

Pareto chart identifying coiled tubing completion cost drivers. 452

Figure

3. Wellhead

developed

for coiled tubing

completion

procedure.

Hammer

union treecap to API 7 flanged crossover

10 threaded

API 7 by API 1 Iii flanged head with 3 API flanged

fracture gate valves

Apl 1 1 to API 7 flanged

adapter

API 7 flanged Internal

gate valve 6.75

diameter

API 7 flanged

tubinghead

Surface

casing casing

7 production

3.5

8 Round internal

upset threads BOPE)

(to connect 10 Hammer (same

to Coiled tubing WIiOn as lubricator)

threads

10 threaded 2.375

to API 7 flanged upset threads

crossover

internal

u
Figure

2/375

blast joint

4. Hammer

Union Treecap

with attatched 453

blast joint.

Convent iona 1 Ccmplet ion (1992 Average) cost

t t
I

Coi led Tbg Completion (1993 Average)

Coat

(MS) Percent Percent I .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I D,1OI c,luc, ad.. ?f.~ ~~.~ 70 0 ~Q.~ ru, ~,o. G.. . 1 I I 49.1 27.5 Sand 43.6 18.2 I I t i 25.9 14.5 Frac Fluid 40.1 16.8 I I 6.5 3.6 Mi lage/Oel ivery , 8.7 3.6 I 5.2 2.9 Frac Van 5.3 2.2 1 5.2 2.9 Other 5.1 2.1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------I t 71.76 72.84 128.1 Frac Subtotal 174.3

(M$)

1.6 Rig 2.8 11.5 4.8 ~Qi !ed T@ o 4.4 0,0 7.8 I 2.0 3.6 4.0 Equipment Rentals ~ 9.5 I I 8.7 4.9 Perforate 9.2 3.8 I I 4.2 7.5 Uireline 7.4 3.1 I f t Tubing 6.5 3.6 6.3 2.6 I I 1.5 Punp 1.5 2.6 3.5 4 1.1 Supervision 1.7 ; 2 2.1 Uel lhead 3.8 1.6 3.8 I I 0.0 3.2 1.3 Snubbing Unit I I I 1 1.0 Completion Fluid 1.8 3.5 1.5 I I 1 Transportation 1.1 0.6 1.3 0.5 I I 1.3 0.7 Uaste Disposal 1.1 0.5 I I Location 0.9 0.5 0.7 0.3 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Total 239 100 ~ 179 100

Table 3.

Mobils Lost Hills Diatomite

Completion

Costs for 1992 and

1993

2 1$%Reduction

I&3

1989 through

1992 cost average

... ........ / ...... .

1 1988 Figure 5.

B 1989 1990 1991 costs for last 6 years 454 1992 1993

Average Lost Hills completion