首页> 外文期刊>SPE Drilling & Completion >A Review of Screen Selection for Standalone Applications and a New Methodology
【24h】

A Review of Screen Selection for Standalone Applications and a New Methodology

机译:独立应用程序的屏幕选择综述和新方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Standalone screens (SASs) in open hole can provide highly reliable sand-control completions at a lower cost and with less operational complexity than other openhole sand-control completions and can provide long-term productivity performance comparable to other openhole completions when applied in the "right environment with the right procedures." Although many in the industry would agree with the preceding statement, there is no consensus on what the right environment is and what the right procedures are. Even when there is agreement on the applicability of SASs for a particular sand-size distribution, there are considerable differences in the recommended screen type and screen opening between various laboratories. In this paper, we critically review the various laboratory testing procedures used in the industry and the interpretations made to evaluate screen performance and screen selection for SAS applications. We demonstrate that the way some of the laboratory tests are performed makes them biased toward one type of screen (wire wrap) and that some are interpreted without sufficient information such that they almost always favor another type of screen (premium mesh). We show that severe screen plugging with clean formation sand is almost never an issue and that the probability of screen plugging because of other factors can be minimized when proper precautions are taken. We propose that candidates for SAS applications be initially selected on the basis of sand-retention performance, with the final selection confirmed on the basis of screen/sand pack permeability measurements. In addition, on the basis of approximately 185 laboratory tests performed on various types of wire-wrap (6 to 16 gauge) and premium mesh (60 to 600 (am) screens for unconsolidated sands and using a set criterion for sand retention, we conclude that many of the currently used criteria in the industry for selection between gravel packing and SAS are highly conservative and unduly limit the possible application of SASs.
机译:与其他裸眼防砂完井相比,裸眼中的独立筛网(SAS)可以以更低的成本提供高度可靠的防砂完井,并且操作复杂度更低,与“正确的环境和正确的程序。”尽管业内许多人都同意上述声明,但是对于什么是正确的环境以及什么是正确的程序尚无共识。即使就SAS适用于特定粒度的沙子达成共识,各个实验室之间推荐的筛子类型和筛子开口也存在很大差异。在本文中,我们将严格审查行业中使用的各种实验室测试程序,以及为评估SAS应用程序的屏幕性能和屏幕选择而做出的解释。我们证明了一些实验室测试的执行方式使它们偏向一种类型的筛网(金属丝缠绕),并且有些解释没有足够的信息,因此它们几乎总是偏爱另一种类型的筛网(优质筛网)。我们证明,用干净的地层砂严重堵塞筛网几乎是没有问题的,并且在采取适当的预防措施后,由于其他因素,筛网堵塞的可能性可以降至最低。我们建议,首先根据防沙性能选择SAS应用程序的候选人,最后根据筛网/沙包渗透率测量结果确定最终选择。此外,在对各种类型的钢丝绳(6至16号)和优质筛网(60至600(上午),用于疏松砂土)进行的大约185次实验室测试的基础上,并使用设定的保砂标准,得出结论业内目前在砾石充填和SAS之间进行选择的许多标准都非常保守,过分地限制了SAS的可能应用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号