SPE/IADC 52810

Best Completion Practices

William Q. Dyson, SPE, Schlumberger Oilfield Services; Earl Coludrovich, SPE; Rachael Creech; John C. Weldy, SPE,
Texaco Exploration and Production; Michael Fruge, SPE; Marlon Guidry, SPE, Schlumberger Oilfield Services
IADC Members
Copyright 1999, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1999 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in
Amsterdam, Holland, 911 March 1999.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC Program Committee following
review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the
International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE or IADC, their
officers, or members. Papers presented at the SPE/IADC meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the SPE and IADC. 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
an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract 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.

Figure 1 titled Single, Flowing Completions, depicts each of

the completion types discussed in this paper; it also contains
some completion guidelines and decision aids. An Alliance
Process Improvement Team (APIT) designed this schematic as
a reference for basic decisions concerning completions. The
APITs purpose is to implement process improvements, reduce
completion costs and increase overall efficiency by merging
the knowledge and experience of operating and service
company personnel; the completion practices outlined in this
paper are focused toward this goal.

Abstract
Over one hundred Gulf of Mexico completions have been
analyzed over a period of two years, resulting in the best
practices, as outlined in this paper. The completions have been
categorized into ten different types, and optimized methods for
implementing each type are listed. Completion engineers,
production engineers, rig foremen and many service company
personnel have contributed to Best Completion Practices. The
work, however, has mainly been driven by an Alliance Process
Improvement Team (APIT) composed of the authors, thus
shared visions and solutions are the means by which common
completion objectives have been reached.

It should be noted that all of the completion types discussed in

this paper are flowing, and have only a single tubing string.
Some completions such as cased hole horizontal, furan resin
consolidation and screenless frac packs did not exist in the set
of wells examined, so they have been omitted from discussion.

Introduction
The number of possible completion configurations for oil and
gas wells is infinite; nevertheless this paper endeavors to
classify completions into three basic categories: non-sand
control, sand control and horizontal. This classification is
based on experience from over one hundred Gulf of Mexico
wells. Several conventions are adopted in order to define these
three major completion categories: (1) a non-sand control
completion is any non-horizontal completion without a gravel
pack screen, (2) a sand control completion is any nonhorizontal completion with a gravel pack screen, and (3) a
horizontal completion is one with deviation greater than
eighty-five degrees. For example, a well with seventy-degree
deviation and no gravel pack screen would be termed non-sand
control. Within these three categories there are ten individual
completion types, which are diagrammed in Figure 1 (located
in the appendix).

A number of different completion configurations exist for

wells with multiple pay zones; sometimes only minor changes
are made for different well conditions. Once it has been
determined whether sand control and fracturing are necessary,
the process of equipment selection can begin. Pertinent
reservoir information is also necessary to determine working
pressures for equipment. The completions discussed below
can be greatly affected by the lack of a satisfactory primary
cement job across the pay intervals. Methods to handle
secondary cementing will be mentioned at the end of the
discussion on completion types.

Common Decisions
In the Gulf of Mexico it is common to encounter multiple pay
sands with commercial potential in a single well. This can
prove very helpful to the economics of a newly drilled well,
but increased planning is required to provide the operator with
an optimal completion.

Nodal analyses and economic evaluations are performed to

determine whether to complete and produce multiple zones
simultaneously or independently. Mechanically, it is less risky
to produce the lowest zone to its economic limit and then
recomplete in the upper zone. However, because it is more
economical, the upper zone is often selected as the initial

DYSON, COLUDROVICH, CREECH, FRUGE, WELDY, GUIDRY

SPE/IADC 52810

completion. In this case, a sliding sleeve, or some other type

of isolation device which can be operated with slickline or
coiled tubing, can be used. The major disadvantage in
producing the upper zone first is reliance on isolation devices
that can later fail. Sand production, corrosive well fluids, or
the inability to operate the device can lead to costly
remediation. On the other hand, this type of completion is
more economical because it affords future access to a lower
zone. 9

Type 4 Multiple Packers with Plug Back(s) This type of

completion is used when two productive zones that are
separated by a significant distance need to be completed. The
difference between Type 4 and Type 3 is that two additional
packers are required for Type 4. This configuration allows
block squeeze perforations to be isolated between the two
packers. Placing a plug in the tubing between the lowest two
packers is the easiest way to perform the plug back to the
upper zone.

Non-Sand Control Completions

Within the context of this paper a non-sand control completion
is one that has less than eighty-five degrees deviation, and
does not require sand control screens. These completions are
generally confined to land, inland waters or deep, consolidated
offshore reservoirs.

Perforating Both tubing- and wireline-conveyed perforating

methods are used in non-sand control completions, but the
wireline-conveyed option is more common and more
economical, as it does not require a rig. Shot density, entrance
hole diameter, and perforation tunnel length should be
considered in order to prevent sand production in non sand
control completions. Large diameter, deep penetrating charges
in densities greater than six shots per foot (twelve shots per
foot preferred) can prevent or defer sand production. This
technique allows the production of marginally economic zones
not suitable for sand control completions.

Type 1 Open Hole Single There are many variations of

open hole single completions, but this type is not often used in
the Gulf Coast because of poor consolidation of many of the
formations. However, open hole single completions should not
be eliminated from consideration, as they are inexpensive and
quite versatile. However for well consolidated formations,
open hole single completions should be considered because of
their low cost and versatility.
Type 2 Cased Hole Single Unlike open hole completions,
cased hole single completions guarantee hole stability.
Furthermore, a successful primary cement job will isolate the
productive interval from water zones. This type of completion
is typical of land and inland waters wells, but it is also found
offshore when sand control is not required. Cased hole single
completions are more expensive than open hole completions
due to the cost of production casing, but they are still relatively
inexpensive due to the limited hardware and number of
services required for their installation. Aside from the cost of
setting production casing, completion costs include tubing,
nipples, packer, fluids and perforating (normally done with
wireline). Shallow dry gas wells (1,400 to 3,000 feet) may
frequently be produced in this manner, whereas oil zones at
similar depths require sand control.
Type 3 Single Packer with Plug Back(s) The cost and
mechanics of this completion type are essentially the same as
the previous one. The difference between the two is that Type
3 allows for a future plug back to a secondary zone located
between the primary zone and the production packer. Multiple
wireline plug backs (WLPBs) can be performed under a
single packer as long as the zones are reasonably close
together, and meet the same conditions as the primary zone,
such as not requiring sand-control or artificial lift. In some
cases, WLPBs can be performed with a single packer even
when there are large distances between zones.

Tubing-conveyed guns may be used as zone length increases.

For long zones, which would require multiple wireline trips,
tubing conveyed perforating (TCP) is likely the best option.
Another benefit of TCP is that it allows significantly higher
underbalance pressures than the wireline method. Perforating
underbalanced is important in order to create open, undamaged
perforations so that productivity is not hampered, but it creates
the added risk of sticking the guns in the hole. Using an
exploding firing head to drop the guns upon detonation can
minimize this risk. This technique works very well when the
guns are run in the hole below the production packer.
Other factors to be considered are shot density and phasing.
Many times zero degree phasing and low shot densities are
sufficient, but when there are heterogeneities such as
anisotropy or laminations that require higher shot densities,
TCP is the method of choice. However, when fracture
stimulation is to be performed, wireline-conveyed methods are
most often used because fracturing sufficiently addresses the
heterogeneities. 1,2
Fracturing The second and third completion types described
above may be candidates for a fracture stimulation that is
pumped down the production tubing. Wells that are to be
fractured should be designed so that (1) a permanent, seal bore
type packer is used, and (2) the production seal assembly has
adequate length to accommodate shrinkage during fracturing.
One additional concern is the tubing size: 2 7/8 inch tubing is
generally the smallest size that can accommodate a fracture
treatment, but the pump rate is limited to about twenty barrels
per minute.

SPE/IADC 52810

BEST COMPLETION PRACTICES

Sand Control Completions

There are many completion types commonly considered to be
sand control completions; only those with sand control screens
are addressed here. Four major types of sand control
completions are defined below, and their relative strengths and
weaknesses are discussed. Issues such as sand control pumping
techniques and perforating techniques are discussed later in
this section. While sand control can significantly increase
completion costs, the life of the completion is also greatly
increased. Proper hardware selection insures completion
reliability. Some general rules, which contributed to the
success of the studied wells, include:
1) Maintain 0.85 inch minimum standoff from gravel pack
screen to casing inner diameter.
2) Use ninety feet of blank above gravel pack screen
whenever possible.
3) Keep draw down pressure less than 1000 psi for gravel
packs and 500 psi for non-sand control completions.
4) Restress gravel packs at pressures ranging from 1000 to
1500 psi.
5) Insure that gravel pack assembly inner diameter is at least
1.875 inches.
6) Test cement squeezes to within 80% of fracture gradient.
7) Allow no more than 10 feet between the bottom
perforation and the top of sump packer or bridge plug.
8) Always use P-110 grade pipe in order minimize the risk of
blank pipe collapse.
Type 5 Single Gravel Pack Completion The most basic
and least likely to fail sand control completion, the single
gravel pack is widely used, but is limited by the need for a rig
workover if other zones are to be produced. This completion
type may have a sump packer or a bridge plug below the
gravel pack screen. A sump packer should be used (1) if an
open sump is required in order to accommodate production
logging tools, or (2) to allow debris to fall through the
completion. Bridge plugs or cement retainers (if squeeze
cementing is necessary) are generally used in conjunction with
a bull plugged lower screen. This method saves time and
money during completion operations, but does not allow
complete evaluation of the perforated interval with production
logging tools.
Type 6 Single Selective This type of completion is gravel
packed with an internal sliding sleeve, which allows a nonsand control completion to be produced through the gravel
packed completion. However, if the sliding sleeve fails,
secondary reserves may be lost if a rig workover cannot be
justified. For this reason, the zone with larger reserves is
generally produced first. A single selective completion differs
from a single gravel pack in two ways: (1) the presence of a
productive zone below the primary completion, and (2) a
sliding sleeve that allows the production of a secondary zone
after depletion of the primary zone. A major limitation of

single selective completions is their dependence on a sliding

sleeves.
Type 7 Single Selective with Multiple Options The single
selective with multiple options is perhaps the most common
completion in the Gulf of Mexico offshore. This configuration
allows for great versatility and minimizes the need for rig
workovers, but its success depends on the reliability of more
mechanical components than the types discussed above. Great
care must be taken in the design of these completions to insure
their prolonged success.
Type 8 - Stacked Selective This is the most complex of the
single tubing completions and is often avoided for this reason.
It requires the use of no fewer than three gravel pack packers,
and usually a sump packer. These completions are quite
expensive and require several weeks to install, but these
drawbacks are offset by the ability to produce three or more
zones without a single workover. Usually these are installed in
marginally economic zones, and where future workover costs
can be prohibitively high, such as offshore. If significant
reserves exist, performing a future workover to produce uphole
zones is more attractive than the mechanical risk of a complex
completion.
Perforating High shot density guns (casing guns with twelve
shots per foot or more) using big-hole perforating charges are
commonly used to maximize completion efficiency.
Underbalanced perforating is the best technique for removing
debris from the perforation tunnels; consequently, it
contributes greatly to the productivity of the completion.6
Debris can mix with the gravel pack sand, reducing the its
permeability. However, often it is not possible to perforate at
the optimum underbalance pressure due to the following
limitations: (1) the danger of casing collapse, (2) the
production of large quantities of formation sand, (3) the
potential for sticking the pipe or guns, and (4) movement of
the perforating packer.8
TCP systems offer the benefits of longer gun length and
greater underbalance pressures, but they are prone to sticking.
Care must be taken in gun selection to insure annular clearance
(usually one-half to one inch) for two reasons. (1) The
clearance is necessary should guns become stuck and require
fishing. (2) Entrance hole diameter is highly sensitive the
annular clearance. This problem is magnified in deviated
wells where the gun system lies on the bottom of the hole
causing an absence of perforations in the upper portion of the
hole.
Another concern in deviated wells is the cleaning of the
perforation tunnels on the lower side of the hole. Gravity
prevents removal of the debris and thus the tunnels cannot be
properly gravel packed. This makes them suseptible to
collapse which drastically reduces the productivity of the

DYSON, COLUDROVICH, CREECH, FRUGE, WELDY, GUIDRY

completion. Perforation cleaning is also hampered by the

presence of the guns, so for the above reasons, perforating the
lower portion of the hole in deviated zones is often avoided.
Furthermore, the upper portion of the hole in deviated zones is
sometimes not perforated due to the difficulty of placing
gravel pack sand in the perforation tunnels in this portion of
the hole. This perforating method also minimizes the
possibility of water production through an inadequate cement
sheath on the lower side of the hole.
Single Trip Perforating and Gravel Packing The practice of
single trip perforating and gravel packing involves combining
the tools and hardware necessary for both perforating and
gravel packing, and running them into the hole simultaneously.
This method saves many hours of rig time, and prevents large
fluid losses after perforating. 7, 11 These two benefits lower
completion cost and enhance well productivity; they should be
used whenever possible. Some factors that limit the use of
single trip perforating and gravel packing systems are
inadequate sump space for perforating guns, productive zones
beneath the zone of interest, and old perforations above the
zone of interest.4 (The term single trip perforating and gravel
packing does not imply that frac packing is not an option with
these systems.)
Sand Control Pumping Techniques The sand control
completion types discussed above require pumping, normally
one the following techniques: (1) a gravel pack using a mildly
viscous carrier fluid, (2) a high rate water pack (HRWP) using
a completion brine carrier fluid, or (3) a frac pack, which uses
a highly viscous carrier fluid.
Frac packs generally provide good completion efficiency with
a slightly negative skin. They minimize the mobility of fine
grained sediments, and thus reduce the necessity for future
acid treatments.5 Drawback of frac packs are that they
sometimes require long clean up periods and they can foul the
production facilities with guar gel. These problems can be
minimized by using visco elastic surfactant (VES) fluids. The
viscosity of VES fluids is broken upon contact with
hydrocarbons, thus causing less proppant pack damage, and
providing faster well clean up.
Another common use of VES fluids is in gravel packing. They
can be used effectively to reduce pumping costs when the
alternative carrier fluid is heavy completion brine. This VES
method is the middle ground between frac packs and gravel
packs using completion brine. Since they are slightly viscous,
VES fluids allow typical proppant concentrations of three to
four PPA, and proppant placement is usually at least 150
pounds of proppant per foot of perforations. Normally, pump
rates are about 8 barrels per minute (BPM). These treatments
are pumped in the circulating position with the annulus closed.
Near the end of the treatment, 25% of the pump rate is allowed
to return through the annulus to insure a good pack. This

SPE/IADC 52810

method is also applied to gravel packs using completion

brines, commonly referred to as high rate water packs
(HRWP).
Most current sand control pumping techniques fall into one of
the above categories. Frac packs are almost always considered
to be the best method unless (1) the reserves do not justify the
expense, (2) there is excessive zone length in a highly deviated
well, or (3) there is significant risk of connecting a nearby
water sand with the frac pack.
Remedial Cementing In circumstances where the primary
cement job does not meet acceptable standards, secondary
cementing techniques are sometimes necessary. The most
common method is a block squeeze. Cement block squeezes
are performed in an effort to isolate productive zones and
prevent extraneous water production. They can also
substantially drive up the cost of the initial completion.
Determining whether a block squeeze is necessary is usually
left up to the completion engineer based on his interpretation
of the cement bond log. In the past, if there was doubt about
the interpretation, a block squeeze was usually performed. To
prevent an excessive number of block squeezes, thereby
reducing costs, the APIT recommends the following guidelines
for sufficient bond:12
1)
2)
3)
4)

5 feet of 60% bond in 5 inch casing

6 feet of 60% bond in 5 inch casing
10 feet of 60% bond in 7 inch casing
12 feet of 60% bond in 7 5/8 inch casing

These guidelines promote a lean forward approach to

reducing the number of block squeezes, resulting in three main
benefits, significantly reduced completion costs, less rig time
and elimination of complications resulting from the squeezes.
Horizontal Completions
A horizontal completion offers several advantages over a high
angle or vertical completion: (1) it can eliminate water or gas
coning problems, (2) it increases the area open to flow thus
reducing reservoir fluid velocities and fine grained sediment
mobility, and (3) it may allow for more efficient reservoir
drainage.3 These benefits make horizontal wells very
attractive, but there are also limitations, including increased
drilling and completion cost, poor completion reliability and
very limited intervention options. In order to optimize
completion design, it is necessary to compare the costs and
benefits of several viable completion options.
For discussion purposes, horizontal completions have been
divided into two main types, supported and unsupported open
hole. In supported completions, the support is in the form of a
slotted liner or a shrouded screen. A shrouded screen refers to
the open hole version of the shunt tube technology where
integral joints of perforated casing and gravel pack screen are

SPE/IADC 52810

BEST COMPLETION PRACTICES

made up and run in the hole simultaneously. It should be noted

that screen alone is not considered adequate support for the
borehole.
Type 9 - Open Hole Unsupported This type of horizontal
open hole completion may be without screen, or it may have
any type of sand control screen with or without a gravel pack.
This type of completion is divided into three sub-categories:
barefoot, screened, and gravel packed. Barefoot completions
are those without screen or gravel pack, and are the least
expensive of horizontal completions, but they are limited to
competent rock that does not produce sand. Screened and
gravel packed completions are effective in controlling sand
production, and reduce the migration of fine grained sediment
into the wellbore. It should be noted that none of the horizontal
completion types discussed above are recommended in
formations with poor hole stability. Experience has shown that
open hole, unsupported horizontal completions fail if they are
placed in formations with an unstable borehole.
Type 10 - Open Hole Supported If the competency or
stability of the hole is questionable, an alternative horizontal
completion is the open hole supported type, in which
mechanical borehole support, in the form of a slotted liner or
shrouded screen, is added. In one field where seven horizontal
wells were completed, six were Type 9 and one was Type 10.
After slightly more than one year of production, all but two of
the unsupported variety had failed. The supported well was, in
fact, the most trouble-free horizontal in the field.
Note that the supported, horizontal completion type does not
include cemented, cased hole horizontal completions. These
have been omitted from this discussion because none existed
in the wells that were studied.
Summary and Recommendations
For competent formations, non sand control completions are
best because of fewer components, little risk and low
installation cost. In poorly consolidated formations, sand
control completions are required. Since they are more prone to
failure and intervention is expensive, mechanical risk should
be minimized. Horizontal completions are the best alternative
in reservoirs where a fluid interface such as an oil-water
contact is present and the vertical and horizontal permeability
are similar.
Communication and flexibility are keys to designing and
performing the optimum completions. This communication
should begin long in advance of the drilling phase of the well.
Expected flowrates should be identified by the production
engineers and confirmed with the geologists data. Nodal
analyses should be performed over the entire range of possible
outcomes, and the most likely production tubing size should be
selected. The actual reservoir often differs from initial
expectations, so changes to the completion design are

common. It is imperative have sufficient to incorporate these

changes both from a cost and equipment standpoint. Wells
with deviations greater than sixty-five degrees may require
additional planning since equipment such as electric line
cannot be used. In these wells, the number of trips should be
minimized whenever possible to avoid increased cost and
reduce the chance sticking. Logging and slickline work should
be minimized or eliminated.
Completions with multiple pay zones require more equipment
and hardware (packers, gravel pack settings, etc.) than single
zone completions. Because of the difficulty and expense of
removing this equipment, designs should attempt to minimize
risk whenever feasible. Sliding sleeves have less chance of
failure if not relied upon to produce upper sands prior to lower
sands. Another danger lies in using unproven technology and
equipment with inadequate caution. However, the rewards of
using new systems such as single trip perforating and gravel
packing have been well worth the risk. The overall goal in
multiple zone completion design should be to achieve a
trouble-free completion that will provide a production outlet
for the life of all zones in the well.
The importance of post-completion bottom hole pressure data
can not be overemphasized. Tracking completion performance
and determining the extent of formation stimulation or damage
is essential in designing and developing new completion
procedures. However, without drawdown and buildup test
data, the validity and efficiency of these methods cannot be
accurately assessed.10

DYSON, COLUDROVICH, CREECH, FRUGE, WELDY, GUIDRY

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the previous members of the
Completion APIT , especially R. J. Buddy Domangue for his
efforts in drafting the original schematic entitled Single,
Flowing Completions. This work was the basis and
inspiration for Best Completion Practices.
References
1. Behrman, L.A, Nolte, K.G. Perforating Requirements for
Fracture Stimulation SPE 39453. Presented at the SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage Control,
Lafayette, LA; February 1998.
2.

Economides, M.J., Nolte, K.G.: Reservoir Stimulation,

Schlumberger Educational Services, Houston, TX, 1987.

3.

Milne, A.; Horizontal Well Completion and Stimulation

Technology, Dowell Schlumberger, Houston, TX, 1991.

4.

Jones, R.H., Bolin, T.D. New Single Trip Single Trip

Perforating and Gravel Pack Procedure with Advanced
Stimulation Design Reduces Formation Damage in High
Permeability Reservoirs: Case Histories. SPE 39434
Presented at the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA; February
1998.

5.

Toffanin, E. et al: Frac Packing Using Conventional and

Alternative Path Technology: SPE 39478 Presented at the
SPE International Symposium on Formation Damage
Control, Lafayette, LA; February 1998.

6.

McLeod, H.O.: The Effect of Perforating and Perforation

Cleaning on Gravel Packed Well Performance. SPE
39456 Presented at the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA; February
1998.

7.

Palthe, P.V.W. et al A Novel Technique for SingleSelective Sand Control Completions Cuts Completion
Costs in Half: Method Development and a Case History
from the Gulf of Mexico SPE 50650 Presented at the
EUROPEC Conference, Den Haag, The Netherlands;
October, 1998.

8.

Tariq, S.M.: New, Generated Criteria for Determining

the Level of Underbalance for Obtaining Clean
Perforations SPE 38635.

9.

Cramer, D.D.: Knowledge of State-of-Art Techniques

Important Oil and Gas Journal (Aug 22, 1988) PP 41-47.

10. McLeod, H.O., Pashen, M.A.: Well Completion Audits

to Evaluate Gravel Packing Procedures SPE 31088
11. Parlar, M. et al: Guidelines for Selection of Fluid Loss

SPE/IADC 52810

Control Methods Before and After Treatments to

Maximize Well Productivity and Cost Effectiveness SPE
39460, Presented at the SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA; February
1998.
12. Texaco-Schlumberger, New Orleans Completion APIT
Update; Third Quarter 1997.

SPE/IADC 52810

BEST COMPLETION PRACTICES

Appendix

Non Sand Control Completion

Non
Sand Control Completion
Best
Practices
Best Practices
Perforate
through tubing using wireline conveyed strip guns
Perforate
through
tubing
wireline
conveyed
strip gunstubing and packer
If TCP
techniques
are
used,using
run guns
in hole
with production
If up
TCP
aredown
used,orrun
guns in
hole
withwhenever
production
tubing and packer
Set
fortechniques
wireline plug
wireline
plug
back
possible
Set2 up
wireline
or wireline
plug backoperations
whenever possible
Use
7/8for
inch
tubingplug
as adown
minimum
when fracturing
are expected
Use 2 7/8 inch tubing as a minimum when fracturing operations are expected
Limitations
Limitations
May
produce formation sand
May produce
formation
Reserves
may not
justify asand
rig workover
Reserves may not justify a rig workover

Single,
Single,Flowing
FlowingCompletions
Completions

Bestslotted
Practices
Use
liner or shrouded screens where hole stability is a concern
Use
slotted
linertooraddress
shrouded
screens
where
holegrained
stabilitysediment
is a concern
Use
gravel
packs
stop
migration
of fine
Use
gravel
packs to address
stop
migration
fine grained
sediment
Use
these
completions
to prevent
water
or gasofconing
in suitable
Use these completions to prevent water or gas coning in suitable
reservoirs
reservoirs
Limitations
Limitations
Poor
hole stability can cause catastrophic completion failure
Poor
hole stability
cause
failure
If the
completion
fails,can
it may
becatastrophic
necessary tocompletion
sidetrack the
well
If the and
completion
fails,ofit these
may be
necessary
sidetrack
the well
Drilling
completion
wells
can be to
quite
expensive
Drilling and completion of these wells can be quite expensive

Development Plan
Development Plan
Sand Control Completion
Sand
Control Completion
Best
Practices

1 - Open Hole Single

1 - Open Hole Single

Secondary zones in well?

Secondary zones in well?
no
no

Horizontal Completion
Horizontal
Best
Practices Completion

Best Practices
Combine
pipe trips when possible: one trip perforating and gravel pack.
Combine
pipe trips
possible:
one frac
trip perforating
and
gravel
Perforate
balanced
orwhen
overbalance
when
packing (can
use
wire pack.
line).
Perforate
balanced
or overbalance
when
frac packing (can use wire line).
Perforate
TCP
under-balanced
if not frac
packing.
Perforate
under-balanced
not frac
packing.
Frac
pack toTCP
reduce
the mobility ofif fine
grained
sediment
Frac pack to reduce the mobility of fine grained sediment
Limitations
Limitations
Take
care to avoid sticking guns when perforating under-balanced.
Take carereliability
to avoid sticking
when sleeves
perforating under-balanced.
Completion
may relyguns
on sliding
Completion reliability may rely on sliding sleeves

no

Stable Bore Hole?

Stable Bore Hole?

9 - Supported Open Hole

9 - Supported Open Hole

Secondary zones in well?

Secondary zones in well?
5 - Single Gravel Pack
5 - Single Gravel Pack

- can be naked open hole

- may use a screen, slotted liner
- may be gravel packed

no

10 - Unsupported Open Hole

10 - Unsupported Open Hole

- good bore hole support

- may have screen inside liner
- may or may not be gravel
packed

yes

- no bore hole support

- may have screen in open hole
- may or may not be gravel
packed

open hole

open hole

yes

yes

2 - Cased Hole Single

2 - Cased Hole Single

Large distance between

Large and
distance
between
Primary
Secondary?
Primary and Secondary?
- may use sump packer or bridge plug

zone of
interest

no
sliding
sleeve

- can do through tubing gravel pack

no

3 - Single Packer Plug Back

3 - Single Packer Plug Back

yes

7 - Single Selective with Multiple Options

7 - Single Selective with Multiple Options

6 - Single Selective
6 - Single Selective

}
}

Producing zones from bottom to top is standard

Producing
zones from
bottom
to top
standard
practice,
but sliding
sleeves
enable
anyiszone
to be
practice,first.
but However,
sliding sleeves
enablerisk
anyshould
zone tobebe
produced
mechanical
produced
first.toHowever,
risk should
be
evaluated
prior
producingmechanical
up-hole reserves
before
evaluated
to producing
up-hole
lower
ones. Itprior
is likely
that the zone
withreserves
more before
lower ones.
It is likely
zone with
recoverable
reserves
willthat
be the
produced
first.more
recoverable reserves will be produced first.

4 - Multiple Packer Plug Back

4 - Multiple Packer Plug Back

secondary
sliding
sleeve

Considerations for Sand Control Pumping

for Sand
Control
Pumping
1) Considerations
Frac packs are preferable
to gravel
packs
except when:
1) Frac packs
preferable
to gravel packs except when:
reserves
do not are
justify
the expense
reserves
do not justify
the expense
there
is excessive
zone length
in a highly deviated well
there
is excessive
zone
length in aahighly
there
is significant
risk
of connecting
waterdeviated
sand well
therepacks
is significant
riskthe
of connecting
water
sand
2) Frac
minimize
mobility ofafine
grain
sediment
2) Frac
packs
minimize
the mobility
of fine grain sediment
and
the need
for future
acid treatments
and
the
need
for
future
acid
treatments
3) VES fracturing fluids can be used on frac packs to minimize
3) VESflow
fracturing
fluids canand
be proppant
used on frac
packs
to minimize
back problems
pack
damage
flow back
problems
and be
proppant
4) Slightly viscous
VES
Fluids can
used inpack
placedamage
of
4) Slightly
viscous
VES Fluids
be used
in place of
heavy
completion
brinescan
on gravel
packs
heavy completion brines on gravel packs

8 - Stacked Selective
8 - Stacked Selective

May or may not

need screens

primary

- can do through tubing plug back

- limited access to primary zone

Spacer assembly required

sump packer

primary

}
}

sliding
sleeve

potential non

gravel packed zone

non gravel packed

zone

Figure 1- Single, Flowing Completions

Tubingless, packerless, monobore,

Tubingless,
monobore,
dual
and coiledpackerless,
tubing completions
dual
and coiled tubing completions
not
depicted.
not depicted.

sliding
sleeve

upper zone
primary zone with
sliding sleeve

secondary

Gravel pack screen

Slotted liner or shrouded screen

sump packer

potential non

gravel-packed completion

This diagram was originally prepared by

R. This
J. Domangue
diagram was
of Texaco,
originally
and
prepared
was by
revised
R. J. by
Domangue
the Texaco-Schlumberger
of Texaco, and was
Completion
revised byAPIT
the Texaco-Schlumberger
for presentation with
Completion
APIT
for presentation
with
SPE
52810 Best
Completion
Practices.
SPE 52810 Best Completion Practices.