SPE 92883

Assessment of Rigless Water Shutoff Using Through-Tubing Bridge Plug in a Large

Onshore Oil Field in Saudi Arabia
Y.Y. Al-Ghasham, Saudi Aramco

Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 14th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and
Conference held in Bahrain International Exhibition Centre, Bahrain, 1215 March 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
A large onshore oil field in Saudi Arabia is supported by
peripheral water injection that started 40 years ago. Parts of
the field are becoming mature with increasing water
production. This poses a challenge as well production is
declining and/or, in some cases, ceasing to flow as water cut
increases, leaving in-place oil potential that needs to be
recovered. Increased water production has another side effect
of increasing operating cost to handle and recycle unwanted
additional produced water. To reduce water production and
reactivate the dead wells, several options were implemented,
including facilities operational changes, workovers, and rigless chemical and mechanical techniques.
One of the easiest and most cost-effective techniques that has
been used in the field to reduce water production is the
application of the rig-less Through-Tubing Bridge Plugs
(TTBP). This paper presents 15 years experience of the
application of TTBP in vertical open and cased holes as well
as slightly deviated wells. Data were reviewed for more than
130 wells that had water shutoff jobs using TTBP. The paper
discusses results and factors, and reservoir as well as
completion parameters that contribute to the success of this
rig-less water shutoff technique. These factors include
permeability thickness and productivity index, well
completion, very high permeability intervals, reservoir
pressure, tight porosity intervals, and the flowing wellhead
pressure. Discussion of the economics of the application is
also presented.
Introduction
An onshore oil field, produced initially in 1951, is supported
by peripheral water injection that started in 1965. Increased
water cut causes well production to decline and/or in some
cases cease to flow, resulting in leaving oil unrecovered.

Figure-1 shows an actual example of a wells production rate

decline due to increased water production. Increased water
production also increases the handling operating cost.
Vertical wells in this field cease to flow due to increase in
water cut ranging between 30-80% depending on the reservoir
characteristics and due to system back pressure. The oil
handling facilities in this field were operating at 150 psi and,
in an attempt to revive dead wells, some of the facilities had
their operating pressure successfully reduced to 120 psi and
could not be lowered further. The facilities gas capacities
were limited to handle the increased evolved gas rate. At
present, economics does not support expenditures to handle
excess gas rate from the oil wells.
Many rig-less technologies are available to shut-off or reduce
unwanted water production using cement, marble chips, bridge
plugs or polymer gel, etc. One of the easiest and most cost
effective techniques being used as a routine method in this
field to reduce water production is the application of ThroughTubing Bridge Plugs (TTBP).
Field Description
This onshore oil field is 280 km long and 26 km wide and is
supported by peripheral water injection. The pay zone is
approximately 250 thick and of carbonate formation with
some dolomite sequences. The pay zone is subdivided into 4
zones with the best productivity in Zone-2. Although sweep is
irregular in some parts of the field, in general, the sweep is
uniform and from bottom up vertically. A normal flow meter
profile is shown in Fig. 2. Most wells were drilled vertically
penetrating the whole pay zone with 6-1/2 open holes or 41/2 perforated cased holes. With the advancement in
horizontal drilling technology, the current practice is to
complete all producers highly deviated or horizontal with one
or multi-laterals.
High permeability streaks, or as called Super-K layers, are
common in the field and concentrate mainly in the dolomitic
facies. These layers may cause irregular water flood
movement especially if they are connected to faults or
fractures.
TTBP Tool Description
Through-Tubing Bridge Plugs (TTBP) are designed in
different sizes to be run and set in different casing and open
hole sizes. The plugs that were used in this field are drillable,

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

have a composite elastomer sealing element, with metal seal

support. The maximum pressure differential ranges from 1,000
psi for the 4-1/2 size to 1,500 psi for the 7 plug at a
maximum temperature rating of 340o F. The plug is run
through tubing using electric cable, and the setting tool is
released after shearing a high force tension stud. Running
outside diameter of the tool is 1-11/16 and 2-1/8 for the 41/2 and the 7 casings, respectively. A casing collar locator
connected in tandem with the TTBP tool string is used for
depth control. The tool can be set in cased holes as well as
open holes. Five to ten feet of cement cap is dumped over the
plug to increase the differential pressure and prolong zonal
isolation. A schematic sketch of the TTBP is shown in Fig. 3.
Factors Affecting Water Shut-off Jobs Using TTBP
The main objectives of the water shut-off jobs are either to
reduce high water rate or to reactivate dead wells. For this
review, the assumption of a successful job is achieving a
minimum of 10% water rate reduction based on a flow test
conducted one month following setting of the plug. The other
assumption is to liven a dead well and sustain production for
at least six months following reactivation. Several reservoir
and completion parameters were correlated to study the effect
of these factors on the success of the water shut-off job:
1.

Permeability Thickness and Productivity Index

Permeability thickness (KH) and productivity index (PI)
for the successful jobs as well as the unsuccessful jobs
were correlated as shown in Fig. 4. The plot suggests that
both reservoir parameters are not significant factors on the
success of the job. However, it seems that, as the data
shows, wells with a PI more than 100 bbl/d/psi are certain
of a successful job.

2.

Well Completion
All of the evaluated wells were completed vertically or
slightly deviated with a maximum drift angle of 40
degrees. These wells were either open or cased hole
completions. Open hole wells normally have a 6-1/2
diameter and the cased hole wells have 4-1/2 perforated
liners across the producing formation. Fig. 5 shows that
the success ratio to reduce water or liven dead wells for
open as well as cased-hole completions is almost the
same, indicating that the type of completion is not a major
contributing factor.

3.

Super Permeability Streaks

Some wells have super permeability streaks where
majority of the flow is produced from a 10-20 interval.
Fig. 6 shows an example of such a well where the super-K
interval at 6525-6532 lies in the water leg and produces
98% of the water production or 55% of the total
production. The TTBP water shutoff jobs have shown that
5 out of 6 wells (83%) that had super-K intervals have
failed to reduce water rates. This suggests that TTBP is
not the best technique for water shutoff in wells with
Super-K intervals. Gel polymers could be suitable for
these kinds of wells to reduce water production.

4.

Reservoir Pressure
Several wells in this review were inactive due to high
water column in the wellbore that could not be lifted at
the low area reservoir pressure. Currently, water injection
wells to support the reservoir are located at the boundary
of the field and, due to transmissibility problems, pressure
support is lagging in some parts of the field. In-field
injection feasibility studies are being investigated.
TTBP technique was used to reduce water production and
help to reactivate these dead wells. Results showed that
this technique was successful in activating only 28% (23
wells) of the total treated dead wells as shown in Fig. 7. It
is obvious that TTBP success is limited for livening dead
wells that are in low reservoir pressure areas. Reactivating
dead wells using TTBP technique will have a much higher
success rate if combined with ways to improve the area
reservoir pressure.

5.

Tight Porosity Interval

A standard practice in the company is to consider a
porosity value of less than 5% as a non-productive
interval. Reservoir engineers usually select a tight
porosity interval to act as a barrier against the high water
rate intervals. The TTBP is then set across that interval,
and the barrier, which is believed to be not extending far
into the formation, is supposed to limit upward movement
of water inside the formation. Fig. 8 shows that 69% of
the total treated wells had barriers and were successful
jobs (51% success). This illustrates that presence of a
barrier definitely contributes toward the success of a
water shut-off using TTBP technique.

6.

Flowing WellHead Pressure

Setting TTBP in the well is a non-rig re-completion to
plug back the well and reduce the perforated interval
thickness. This creates higher pressure drawdown, that
aggravates coning behavior. Restricting total withdrawal
rate can reduce conning effect and consequently reduce
water production. In the case of the wells under this
review, production rate was restricted at surface by
inducing backpressure on the well using surface choke
valves. This had resulted in a higher Flowing Wellhead
Pressure (FWHP) and lower drawdown to minimize/delay
upward water movement in the formation. Table 1
indicates that the majority of the successful jobs were
restricted at surface even further as compared to pre-plug
settings. It is also worth noting that Group 3 wells in
Table 1 had successful jobs when produced at restricted
rate following placement of the TTBP, even though these
wells had no tight porosity barrier as discussed earlier.
Most of the successful jobs were produced at higher
FWHPs than pre-job FWHPs. FWHPe data available for
non-dead wells before and after setting the TTBP are
shown in Fig. 9. The data highlights that many wells had
been restricted to produce at a FWHP of 100-200% higher
than the pre-job FWHP, resulting in reduced coning effect
and extending the producible life of the well.

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

Economics
The application of TTBP in this onshore oil field has been
economical with an average payback period of 3.5 days.
By successful application of TTBP technique in 93 out of
136 wells, an immediate oil gain of 112 MBOD was
achieved. This gain was based on flow tests that were
conducted one month following plug setting.
TTBP had also successfully reduced 155 mbd of water
production (55% reduction as compared to pre-job water
production rate). This translates into $6,200 savings off
the produced water handling costs for one month. Fig. 10
and 11 highlight these results. An earlier investigation
showed that the wells treated with TTBP maintained
lower water production as compared to pre-job rates for a
period of 1.5 - 2 years.
Conclusions
Through Tubing Bridge Plug (TTBP) has been
successfully and economically applied on a large scale to
reduce water production. 68% success ratio was achieved
through the application of this technology.

The main factors that contributed to the success of the

jobs were existence of a porosity break above the
unwanted water production area and restricting wells
production following plug setting.

As a rule of thumb, increasing Flowing Well Head

Pressure (FWHP) at 100-200% more than pre-job FWHP
is a good starting point to produce the well following plug
setting.

Permeability thickness, productivity Index and well

completions (open or cased holes) have no major effect on
the success of the TTBP Jobs. However, it was observed
that wells with PI equal or higher than 100 BPD/psi have
an excellent chance of a success job.

It was also observed that TTBP is not a favorable

technique to shut-off water in wells with Super
permeability intervals.

This technology had also limited success to reactivate

dead wells that were inactive due to high water column
and low reservoir pressure

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Results Using TTBP as Effective Water Shut-Off

Treatment in Openhole Well Completions in Saudi
Arabia, paper SPE 39616 presented at the SPE/DOE
Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa,
Oklahoma, April 19-22, 1998.
Mahmoud A. Fotuh, and Sameh Macary: Factors That
Affect the Success of Mechanical Water Shut-off in
Wells, paper SPE 62891 presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas,
Texas, October 14, 2000.
Makki A. AL-Zubail, Redha H. Al-Nasser, Saleh A. AlUmran, Saeed S. Al-Saeed: Rigless Water Shutoff
Experience in Offshore Saudi Arabia, paper SPE 81443
presented at the SPE 13th Middle East Oil Show &
Conference held in Bahrain April 5-8, 2003.
Fahad A. Al-Ajmi, Ali M. Al-Shahri, Mustafa M. Sengul,
and Robert Phelps: Evaluation of Super-K Wells
Performance Using Fluid Flow Index in Ghawar Field,
paper SPE 68162 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil
Show held in Bahrain, March 1720, 2001.
K.S. Chan: Water Control Diagnostic Plots, paper SPE
30775 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
& Exhibition held in Dallas, USA, 22-25 October, 1995.
B.J. Rouser, Y.A. Al-Askar, T.H. Hassoun: Monitoring
Sweep in Peripheral Waterflood: A Case History, paper
SPE 21372 presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show
held in Bahrain, November 16-19, 1991.

Acknowledgement
The author wishes to thank Saudi Aramco for permission to
publish this paper.
References
1. M. A. Farooqui, Y. A. A1-Rufaie: Rigless Techniques
Enhance the Effectiveness and Economics of Water ShutOff Treatments, paper SPE 39511 presented at the SPE
India Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition held In New
Delhi, India, February 17-19, 1998.
2. M.A. Mohammed, M.A. A1-Mubarak, A.K. A1-Mulhim,
S.M. A1-Mubarak, and A.A. A1-Safi: Overview of Field

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

Fig. 2
Flow Profile For a Well Showing Most
Water Production from Lower intervals

Fig. 1

An Example of A Well's Production Decline Due to

Increasing Water Cut
80

14000
12000

60

10000
8000

40

6000
4000

20

2000

Oil Production, bbl/d

Water Cut, %
0
Jan-03

Jan-02

Jul-99

Jun-98

Mar-97

Feb-96

Oct-94

Jul-93

May-92

Fig. 3
Schematic Sketch of a TTBP

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

Fig. 4

PI vs. KH of Successful and Unsuccessful Jobs

KH, md-ft

1,000,000

100,000

10,000
Successful Jobs

Unsuccessful Jobs

PI

Fig. 5

TTBP Job Performance Based on Well Completion

100%
90%
80%

OH Success
Ratio, 71%

Success Ratio

70%

CH Success
Ratio, 64%

60%
50%

86 Wells
51 Wells

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

www.petroman.ir

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

1,000

SPE 92883

Fig. 6
An example of a Super Permeability Streak Well Where Majority of
Flow is Produced From Short Interval

Oil Rate
Water Rate, %

Fig. 7

Performance of TTBP Based on Job Objective

100
90

% Success Ratio

80

% Successful Jobs to Reduce Water Production

% Successful Jobs to Reactivate Dead Wells

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

Fig. 8

TTBP Job Performance Based on Existence of Barriers

Failed Jobs
W/O Barrier
14%
Successful
Jobs W/O
Barrier
17%

Successful
Jobs W/
Barrier
51%

Failed Jobs W/
Barrier
18%

Table 1
Results of FWHP Status following TTBP Setting
(for Wells with the objective to Reduce Water Rate)
Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Successful

Not
Successful

Successful

Not
Successful

No. of Wells with the Objective to

Reduce Water Rate

50

20

Presence of Tight Porosity Interval

Yes

Yes

No

No

% No. of Wells Produced at Restricted

Rate Following Plug Setting

72%

50%

80%

14%

Job Success

Note: Wells were grouped based on job success and the presence of tight porosity interval.

www.petroman.ir

SPE 92883

Fig. 9

Pre and Post-Plug Flowing WHD Pressure Change

25

No. of wells

20
15
10
5
0
0-50

51-100

101-200

201-300

300+

Change in FWHP %

Fig. 10

Water Shutoff Performance on Oil Production

300
Increase Due to
Livening Wells

250
Oil Rate, MBbls/d
Thousands

Oil Rate Increase = 71%

200

Increase Due to
Water Reduction

150
100
50
0
Pre -Plug Oil Rate

www.petroman.ir

Pos t-Plug Oil Rate

SPE 92883

Fig. 11

Water Shutoff Performance on Water Production

Water Rate, Mbbls /day

500
400

462

300

Water Volume Reduced =

200

55%

207

100
0
Pre-Plug Water Rate

Post-Plug Water Rate (one

month flow test)

www.petroman.ir