ABSTRACT: This paper compares and validates sand production predictions from two commonly used analytical and numerical methods by utilizing sanding observations from a brown oil field with comprehensive core test data and a field-validated geomechanical model. The analytical sanding method uses a poro-elastic rock behavior model to define the sanding condition, with an effective rock strength factor (ESF) calibrated against field sanding observations. The numerical method uses a poro-elasto-plastic material model with a material model defined from triaxial compressive tests and a critical strain limit (CSL) as the failure criterion numerically determined from the failure of laboratory thick wall cylinder tests. In this study, both methods accurately predict the sanding conditions in the sand producing wells. The core-based CSL matches very well with the field data within a very small margin of error. However, the default ESF value commonly used in the analytical method required tuning to match the sanding data. After the field validation, the predictions for future wells by both methods were identical. Application of both sanding evaluation methods enhances the reliability of the sand production prediction. Once a calibration is obtained, the analytical method has the added benefits of simplicity and quick realizations of various scenarios.

This content is only available via PDF.
You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.