Geomechanical Sanding Analysis: Criticality in Testing and Sampling in Unconsolidated Formations - A Case History

Abstract

Abstract Sand production in unconsolidated formations during sampling can lead to poor quality of samples being acquired due to plugging of flow lines and sealing issues at the probe. Formation pressure and mobility measurements can also be affected by sand production which may cause plugging inside the tool or at the tool inlet and result in increased operational time. Predicting sanding potential thus becomes critical to achieve both operational and formation characterization objectives, especially in deep-water environments, where operation costs are high. Calculating "Critical Draw Down" (CDD) pressure and predicting the sanding envelope through geomechanical-sanding analysis provide insights critical to successful testing and sampling operation. A fit for purpose geomechanical model has been developed based on petrophysical data along with regional knowledge of geomechanical conditions. With the geomechanical model, analytical sanding evaluation is used to calculate a range of CDD values for the likely testing and sampling points using well logs from offset wells. Logs from the studied well are analyzed in real time to update CDDs. The zones least prone to sand production are identified and prioritized for testing and sampling. The pre-drill sanding risk assessment is also used to optimize operational parameters including selection of the best pump and packer types while the real time updated CDD values is incorporated to limit the flowing (drawdown) pressures during the sampling and testing operations. A case study from a deep-water field in India is highlighted where the mentioned workflow developed post logging for a pilot wellbore has helped to optimize decisions in real time during formation pressure testing and sampling in its sidetrack wellbore, thus adding value to reservoir characterization objectives and reducing nonproductive time (NPT). Based on the pre-drill sanding assessment, CDD was found to be in the range of 0 - 500 psi below the formation pore pressure in some of the sand bodies. Also, a large face packer was recommended to enhance sealing efficiency by increasing the contact area with the formation. Pump rate was regulated during pressure testing and sampling to ensure that the pressure never exceeded the pre-defined CDD values thus preventing sand production. Multiple fluid samples were collected successfully without any plugging. This integration of geomechanical assessment with operation contributed to 32% increase in success rate for good quality pressure testing and acquisition of representative samples in the sidetrack wellbore, benefitted from a systematic adaptation of pre-job assessment and real time optimizations compared to the pilot wellbore. The pre-drill petrophysical and geomechanical evaluations provide critical insights to assist in real time optimization of pressure testing and fluid sampling operations in unconsolidated reservoirs. Workflow presented in this paper has proven to be valuable in obtaining reliable formation pressure data and contamination-free formation fluid samples for accurate reservoir and fluid characterization in unconsolidated formations during wireline logging testing and sampling operations.