Abstract
The knowledge of damage profile in horizontal wells is the key to designing the appropriate treatment volume to restore or improve their productivities. The elliptical (conic) damage profile associated with horizontal well is known but review of industry-wide applications by different Operators shows no corresponding uniform correlation between the damage profile and actual treatment volumes that have been applied. The result of this inadequacy has often led to sub-optimal post stimulation performances due to either partial damage removal or formation deconsolidation as a result of little or too much acid volumes across the damaged zones that could lead to poor coverage or over-dose with attendant incomplete damage removal or secondary precipitates respectively. Funds spent on stimulating horizontal wells estimated at average of USD 0.5mln/well did not yield the expected rewards as the stimulation gains are mostly short-lived due to wrong volume design and application.
The problem highlighted above led to the emergence of this engineering model based on the complete knowledge of elliptical horizontal damage profile usually associated with horizontal completions and is presented for improved stimulation solution to the removal of damage in horizontal wells. The approach offers true stimulation in cost effective manner by applying only the right acid volume in the right zone of interest.
The development of the horizontal well stimulation model from the first principle and presentation of easy-to-read table and charts for specific range of well parameters (damage radius, porosity, wellbore radius and drain-hole length/diameter) versus treatment volumes, field applications guide, limitations and costs/treatment benefits are the output derivable from this innovative work.
The benefit of this emerging technology includes; reduction in cost of chemical for well treatment, true stimulation of damaged near-wellbore region and improved performance, minimal contact of acid system to downhole tubular and overall cost efficiency estimated at 50% savings when compared with existing approach that uses about 200% of the required acid volume.
