Re-Evaluation of Gravel-Pack-Sizing Criteria

I n this paper, gravel-pack pore size

is evaluated further by use of the
permeability of the gravel pack and
500
Gravel-Pack Permeability vs. Stress

Permeability
1

other methods. A new sizing method is Length

proposed that is based on the effective 400 0.8
formation size and the gravel-pack pore

Permeability (darcies)
size. In this manner, the gravel pack is

Pack Length (in.)

effectively treated like a screen and the 300 0.6
selection of gravel-pack size becomes
similar to the selection of screen size.
200 0.4
Introduction
Use of a coarser-grained material to stop
the production of a finer-sized forma-
tion sand in oil wells has been practiced 100 0.2
for decades. The selection of the coarser-
grained sand has usually been performed
on the basis of a multiple of one or more 0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
of the smaller particle sizes in the forma-
tion material, with the goal being that Stress (psi)
the formation material will bridge on the Fig. 1—Gravel-pack permeability for 20/40 gravel with increasing uniaxial stress.
larger gravel-pack particles without re-
ducing flow capacity or allowing exces-
sive solids production. horizontal wellbores. Testing methods sizing ratios based on particle-size mea-
This paper presents an alternative ap- have been modified so that gravel-pack surements, or pore size based on pack-
proach to testing and selecting gravel tests can be performed by both constant- ing theory.
sizes in which the size of the formation drawdown and constant-rate methods. Permeability depends on the sizes and
material is addressed by using an effec- A summary of previous impor- shapes of interconnections between adja-
tive size of the formation grains defined tant studies investigating gravel-size- cent pores, which, in turn, are influenced
as the median grain size (d50) divided selection methods is provided in the by the entire grain-size distribution. Par-
by the uniformity coefficient (d40/d90) complete paper. ticle shape has an important effect on
and the gravel pack is described by the permeability because it influences the
apparent pore size of the gravel. This ap- Gravel-Pack Pore Size From Permea- size and shape of interconnections be-
proach allows laboratory performance bility Data. The packing arrangements tween particles. The more angular the
testing for solids production, size of sol- of gravel, along with the size distribu- grains are, the smaller the voids and the
ids, and retained permeability to be com- tion and shape, ultimately determine the more tortuous the flow paths.
pared directly for gravel-pack comple- pore size between gravel particles. Sev- A discussion of methods of pore-size
tions and for screen-only completion. eral methods exist for estimating the calculation and estimation is included in
These data are especially useful in the pore size in porous media. These meth- the complete paper.
selection of the completion method for ods tend to be based on permeability,
Pore Size From Packing Arrange-
ments. Pore size can also be obtained
This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights
by assuming single-size particles in dif-
of paper SPE 179023, “Gravel-Pack-Sizing Criteria: It’s Time To Re-Evaluate,” by ferent packing arrangements. The pore
Christine Fischer, Vernon Constien, and Carla Vining, Constien and Associates, size changes from a maximum for a cubic
prepared for the 2016 SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation pack of 0.414 times the gravel size to
Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 24–26 February. The paper has not been a minimum of 0.1547 times the gravel
peer reviewed. size for hexagonal packing. While gravel

For a limited time, the complete paper is free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.

74 JPT • OCTOBER 2016

packs certainly have a range of sizes
and roundness, these very simple as-
sumptions offer advantages for compar-
ing data from large laboratory-test sets.
Changes in packing order most frequent-
ly occur from differences in sedimenta-
tion or stress.
Comparison of Methods for Estimat-
ing Gravel-Pack Pore Size. Gravel packs
are never single-sized particles, so there
are variable pore sizes inside the pack.
For laboratory-testing purposes, the
gravel pore size can be adjusted on the
basis of gravel distribution, shape, and
stress. However, for comparative pur-
poses across large data sets, it is helpful
to maintain a single method for estimat-
ing gravel pore size.
For the tests in this work, the gravel-
pack thickness was approximately 0.5 in.
and the maximum net uniaxial confining
stress was 1,000 psi. Fig. 1 illustrates the
change in gravel-pack permeability for
a 20/40 gravel across the uniaxial-net-
stress range of 200 to 1,000 psi in the oil-
flow-test equipment. Very little change in
permeability occurred, which indicates
that the packing arrangement has prob-
ably not shifted to a smaller pore size.
To maintain a constant method for es-
timating gravel-pack pore size in evaluat-
ing performance master curves, the me-
dian gravel size multiplied by 0.414 was
selected. This expression has been found
to compare well with results from screen-
only tests on the same formations.
Formation- and Gravel-Particle-Size
Analysis. Regardless of the method used
to select the gravel-pack sand, the first
step is to obtain representative sam-
ples of the formation and determine the
particle-size distributions. As wellbore
construction has shifted to horizontal
wellbores, the number of formation-
particle-size distributions in the lateral
can be quite large. Particle-size analysis
should be performed for each interval
sample. Because only one size of gravel
pack is normally placed into a wellbore,
methods for analyzing the large amount
of formation-particle-size data and re-
ducing it to a small number for testing
must be implemented. Frequency plots
of all the distributions present in a well-
bore are helpful in reducing the data to
critical distributions.
JPT • OCTOBER 2016
The most-common methods for an-
alyzing formation-particle sizes in-
clude dry sieving, occasionally wet siev-
ing, and laser particle-size analysis. In
some cases, dry-sieve analysis may yield
larger-than-actual particle-size values
if fine particulates are present in large
quantities. The electromagnetic forces
between grains tend to promote aggrega-
tion, which shifts the percentage of fines
present in the formation sand.
For this work, all formation-particle-
size data were determined by laser analy-
sis and all gravel data were determined
by sieve analysis. Before beginning
particle-size analysis, the disaggregat-
ed samples must be cleaned of reser-
voir fluids. It may also be necessary to
re-establish wettability after drying the
material if the particles are dispersed in
water for laser analysis.
The parameters calculated from
particle-size analyses—besides the cu-
mulative plots by weight or particle vol-
ume—include the median, which is the
50th percentile on the cumulative curve;
the mean, which is considered the aver-
age grain size; sorting, which measures
the grain-size variation of a sample by
encompassing the largest parts of the
size distribution as measured from a cu-
mulative curve; skewness, which mea-
sures the degree to which a cumulative
curve approaches symmetry; and the uni-
formity coefficient, which is the ratio of
the sizes at d40 to the size at d90 on the
cumulative curve. For this work, the criti-
cal formation sizes are the d50 and the
uniformity (d40/d90).
Gravel-Pack- and Screen-Test Methods.
Several laboratory- evaluation meth-
ods for testing sand-control screens
have been documented in the litera-
ture, but test methods that include grav-
el packs are rarer. The two methods
that have been used to develop data
presented in the complete paper are
known as the constant-drawdown oil-
flow (CDOF) test and the constant-flow-
rate brine (CFRB) test. The CDOF meth-
od has been used in many screen-only
and gravel-pack-plus-screen tests. The
CFRB test has been developed for evalu-
ating screens or gravel packs by a meth-
od that more closely simulates depo-
sition on a screen or gravel pack from
erosion of a sandface environment. The
two methods are summarized in Table 4
of the complete paper.
Conclusions
Approaches to determine a representa-
tive gravel-pack pore size have been eval-
uated, and a simple relationship based
on cubic packing has been selected to
keep data sets constant. For special proj-
ects, other relationships such as perme-
ability could also be used. Two testing
methods that can use constant draw-
down or constant flow rate have been
used in screen-only and gravel-pack test-
ing, and the data can be compared di-
rectly for performance of produced sol-
ids, retained permeability, and size of
produced solids. Selection criteria can
be established by choosing ranges on
the performance master curves that
meet expectations for gravel-pack per-
formance. The ability to directly com-
pare screen-only- and gravel-pack-test
data should aid in completion designs in
soft-formation reservoirs. JPT
Changing Your
Address?
Let SPE know.
+1.972.952.9393
Update Your
Member Profile
http://www.spe.org/
members/update
SPE Benefits
Discover the possibilities.
http://www.spe.org/
members/benefits
75