SPE-217009-MS
Water Shutoff in Fractured Carbonate Vertical and Horizontal Wells by
Bullhead Chemical Injection: A Success Story
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
H. Al Mufargi, H. Al Harthi, A. Al Naabi, M. Al Shuelly, M. Al Rawahi, M. Al Abri, M. Al Farsi, M. Al Rashdi, M. Al
Harrasi, and A. Al Mandhari, Daleel Petroleum LLC, Muscat, Oman; L. Hernando, N. Martin, N. Salehi, J. Bouillot,
A. Templier, G. Omonte, and A. Zaitoun, Poweltec, Rueil-Malmaison, France
Copyright 2023, Society of Petroleum Engineers DOI 10.2118/217009-MS
This paper was prepared for presentation at the ADIPEC held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2 – 5 October, 2023.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 SPE copyright.
Abstract
Many wells in GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) are producing from fractured carbonate reservoirs under
aquifer or water injection pressure support. After water breakthrough, these wells suffer from high water cut
production and low oil production caused by water channeling. An original technology using combination
of microgel and gel was successfully implemented in an open hole fractured horizontal well under aquifer
support (SPE 203394). This technology enables bullhead injection while minimizing the risk of damage.
The treated well almost doubled oil production rate for one year along with a drop in the water cut from
92% to 80%.
Three new campaigns of Water Shutoff treatments were performed in 2 years, using the same technology
in the same type of reservoir. The treatment consisted of microgel injection, followed by gel, followed by
microgel again. These sequences enable protecting the matrix from gelant leak-off and keeping open the
fracture network surrounding the wellbore once the gel is in place. The total volume of treatment was around
250 m3. The size of the different slugs was adjusted according to well characteristics (open interval, flow
rate, etc.). Diagnostic prior to the treatment using WOR Chan plots helped to identify the wells suffering
from strong channeling. All chemicals were injected in bullhead mode. Most injections were performed
through the annulus without pulling out of the hole the tubing string BP and ESP pump. Injection rate was
between 1 and 3 BPM.
Over the 11 wells submitted to the WSO treatments (two vertical and nine horizontal producers),
four responded very positively, showing a sustainable additional oil production over time, five responded
positively for several months, and three did not respond markedly. After treatment, for all the wells, the gross
production could be maintained resulting in extra oil production along with water cut reduction. No well has
been damaged by the treatment confirming the validity of the low-risk approach of this chemical injection
strategy. After continuous surveillance of each treated well, from decline curves analysis and cumulative
oil vs. cumulative water plots, the additional oil production is estimated as 165,000 bbl by end of Dec 2022,
and keeps growing with time. This result has been obtained with mature wells that were producing with
very high water cut (between 86 and 100%) before the treatment.
2 SPE-217009-MS
The water shutoff technology combining microgel and gel can be applied in many reservoirs suffering
from water channeling through fractures. This technology is low risk and can be used either in horizontal
and vertical wells. Chemical injection proceeds rigless and bullhead, thus at low cost, and showed efficiency
in very high water cut wells, inducing production of large quantity of additional oil in a mature field.
Introduction
Many wells worldwide are suffering of excessive water production, which affects oil production and
increases operational costs. In fractured carbonates, after water breakthrough, strong water channeling often
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
occurs through fracture network, inducing rapid increase of the water cut and steep decline of oil production.
High water-cut production strongly affects the economics and often leads to early well abandonment despite
the existence of large quantities of oil in place.
With the increasing number of mature fields, water control becomes a major issue for most of oilfield
operators and strong focus has been made on chemical water shutoff and conformance control. The challenge
is how to take advantage of the pressure support provided by an aquifer of an injection well while minimizing
the intensity of the water channeling. Moreover, the technology has to be easy to deploy with low risk of
well impairment.
Water control can proceed either by injection or production well treatment. Deep Conformance gel
treatments of injection wells aim at creating a flow barrier in the water channel deep in the reservoir (Fig.
1). It usually requires higher volume and gel consistency than water shutoff in oil producer. A recent pilot
deployed in a fractured carbonate formation prior to an ASP injection (Alkaline-Sufactant-Polymer) has
been well documented with many data acquisition (oil/water production in offset producers, inter-well tracer,
bottom hole pressure, ILT). Solving the Conformance problem enabled a successful ASP deployment (Al
Murayri et al., 2021).
Figure 1—Principle of Deep Conformance Treatment.
Water shutoff by gel injection has been performed in a broad range of reservoir and well conditions since
several decades (Seright and Liang, 1994). As an example, several types of gels have been injected in the
fractured dolomite Arbuckle formation in Western Kansas with a high success rate (Moffit, 1993). The gel
is usually injected in the bullhead mode into the whole open interval. Gel consistency is weak to behave
RPM (Relative Permeability Modifier), i.e., strongly decreasing the relative permeability to water with low
incidence on the relative permeability to oil. Each well treatment is usually designed by comparison with
other successful treatments performed on other wells in the same area. The approach is mostly pragmatic
with low scientific considerations. Nevertheless, the success ratio can be significant and the treatment
SPE-217009-MS 3
quickly pays out the low cost of the expenses by additional oil production. Such water shutoff scenario is
often followed by the profession.
From a theoretical stand-point, Seright and co-workers showed that RPM gels are better suited to
fractured than to matrix reservoirs (Liang, Lee and Seright, 1993, Sydansk and Seright, 2007). With fractures
we are dealing with linear flow whereas for matrix we are dealing with radial flow. Moreover, in fractured
reservoirs, water production proceeds through he fractures while oil production proceeds through the matrix.
Flow partitioning between oil saturated and water saturated zones is strong, which is not the case in matrix
reservoirs where oil and water flow together. When oil and water are produced together, a reduction in
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
the relative permeability to water impairs oil permeability by an increase in water saturation. In fractured
formations, the dry oil flowing through the matrix does not face such a water blocking effect induced by
the RPM gel.
A new water shutoff approach has been recently applied in a fracture carbonate horizontal well under
aquifer support (Hernando et al., 2020). It combines microgel and gel injection, each chemical fulfilling a
specific role. The treatment reduced the water cut from 92% to 80%, while maintaining the gross production
unchanged, thus stimulating oil production. The same type of treatment has been implemented in 11 new
wells (9 horizontal and 2 vertical) from the same zone. This paper details the technology, the approached
followed for candidate well selection, the treatment strategy and the results obtained after 1 to 3 years of
production.
Well and Reservoir data
Table 1 summarizes main well data. The treated wells are located in North Oman mainly in Natih reservoir
and produce medium-viscosity black oil with 7cP viscosity (at reservoir conditions) and 22° API gravity.
Reservoir is carbonate limestone whose matrix permeability ranges between 1 and 15mD and is highly
fractured. Most of the time, temperature of the well is 60°C, just two wells exhibit a temperature higher than
80°C. Salinity of formation water is above 100,000ppm. Among the 11 treated wells, 9 were horizontal and
2 were vertical. All the wells are under aquifer support. Water Cut range between 86% and 100%.
Table 1—Characteristics of the treated wells (direction, reservoir formation
and temperature, open interval, production gross and Water Cut).
4 SPE-217009-MS
Technology
To mitigate water influx and increase oil production, RPM treatment combining microgel and gel was
chosen.
Microgel are pre-gelled species having a size of around 2 µm (Fig. 2). Due to their size, they cannot enter
the low-permeability matrix, thus forming a thin film on the matrix, that protects from gel leak-off.
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 2—Conformation of Different Microgel Species. Microgel A has higher crosslinker density.
The gelant is made of a synthetic acrylamide co-polymer and an organic crosslinker. Gel formulation
is adjusted to have a gelation time of several days and a gel consistency of strong elastic gel (Gel F-G in
Sydansk scale (Sydansk, 1985)).
The treatment is performed in three steps (Fig. 3). All chemicals are injected in the bullhead mode into
the whole open interval. The first step consists of microgel injection. The microgel will propagate through
the fracture network and create a protective film on the matrix. The second step consists of gelant injection.
The gelant will invade the fracture network, mostly the most conductive fractures connected to the aquifer.
The gelant will not invade the matrix due to the microgel protective film. Last step consists of microgel
injection to push the gel deep in the reservoir and keep fracture network open close to the well.
Figure 3—Mechanism of WSO Treatment Using Microgel and Gel.
SPE-217009-MS 5
Diagnostic plots and treatment design
The first step was to select the best candidates for the WSO treatment. The main selection criteria was the
existence of a channeling causing the high water cut production. For such purpose we used Chan plots
(Chan, 1980) which measure the evolution of the WOR (Water Oil Ratio) and the derivative WOR’ vs.
time. A strong channeling induces a strong increase of both WOR and WOR’, with WOR values > 10.
An example is given in Figures 5 and 6. From the oil/water production data (Fig. 4), we established the
WOR and WOR’ plots (Fig. 5). For this well (M06), we could identify a strong water channeling problem.
Actually, this well responded very positively to the WSO treatment (see hereafter).
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 4—Production history of Well M06 before treatment. Liquid,
oil and water rate are on first axis and Water Cut is on second axis.
Figure 5—Water Oil Ratio (WOR) and derivative Water Oil Ratio (WOR’) of Well M06 before treatment.
6 SPE-217009-MS
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 6—Water Oil Ratio (WOR) and derivative Water Oil Ratio (WOR’) of Well B26 before treatment.
WOR and WOR’ plots for Well B26 do not increase and remain almost flat with time showing more
matricial flow than channeling (Fig. 6). Actually, this well responded very weakly to the WSO treatment
(see Table 2).
Table 2—WSO treatments and results.
The other parameters taken into consideration for the design of a treatment were the actual production
rate, the extension of the open interval, the intensity of the water channeling, the temperature. Usually, we
target an average penetration depth of 1 to 2m for horizontal wells and 3 to 5 m for vertical wells. The
volume and concentration of each microgel and gel slug was optimized according to well data. On average,
the treatment volume for a horizonal well was around 250 m3 (1500 bbl).
Operational
Make-up water was 2% KCl water. For all the wells, the WSO treatment consisted of the following
sequences:
1. Microgel slug (50-100 m3) at concentration 3000ppm
SPE-217009-MS 7
2. Gel slug (50-150 m3) at polymer/crosslinker concentration ranging between 5000-10000ppm for the
polymer and 1000-3000ppm for the crosslinker
3. Microgel slug (25-90 m3) at concentration 3000ppm
Field equipment is shown in Figure 7. It consists of 4 water storage tanks, 2 paddle mixing tanks and an
injection pump. Chemical injection proceeds through flexible connected to wellhead. All treatments have
been performed rigless, with the existing completion in place. For wells having Y-tool, injection proceeded
through tubing. Most of treated wells had no Y-Tool. In that case injections proceeded through the annulus
between casing and tubing with the following sequences:
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
• Annulus cleaning by KCl water injection while keeping the pump running
• Injectivity test with KCl water at different flow rates from 1 to 6bpm
• Injection of first microgel slug
• Injection of gel slug
• Injection of second microgel slug
• Post-flush of fresh water (60m3) in order to squeeze all the chemicals in the formation
• Well shut-in for 7-14 days
• Restart of the well with slow ramp-up
Figure 7—Surface handling equipment for microgel/gel treatment.
Before the operation, a maximum pressure is established at 80% of the fracture pressure (1000-1400psi).
Injection proceeds continuously, alternating phases of preparation and injection in the twin paddle mixing
tanks.
Results and discussion
Table 2 and Figures 8 to 13 give main results. In Table 2 we classified the wells in three categories. Those
which responded very positively with additional oil production growing with time (4 wells), those which
responded positively in a limited period of time (4 wells), and those which did not respond significantly (3
8 SPE-217009-MS
wells). Each category is given by a color and a sign (+++, + and 0). On the whole around 75% of the wells
have exhibited good results. The additional oil production has been evaluated from Cum Oil vs. Cum Water
plot and DCA. On the overall, after 4 WSO campaigns since August 2019 the eleven treated wells have
produced more than 165,000 bbl of additional oil, and in several wells, additional oil keeps growing with
time. This result has been obtained for an average production time of 18 months per well and concerned
mature wells having a water cut above 90%. It has also to be pointed out that all the wells producing from
Natif E formation have responded positively to the chemical treatment.
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 8—Production history of Well M03 before and after treatment.
Liquid, oil and water rate are on first axis and Water Cut is on second axis.
Some wells responded positively to the treatment with additional oil production growing with time.
An example is given for Well M-03, which responded very positively to the chemical treatment. Data
set is made of production history, WOR, Cumulative oil vs. cumulative water and Decline curve analysis
(DCA) (Figures 8 to 11). Production history of Well M03 shows that, after good production, a strong water
channeling induced a steep jump in the WOR, the well becoming watered out (BSW was almost 100%
before the treatment). After the treatment oil production comes back at a rate of around 150 bopd and
maintains high level with time. For this well, a WSO treatment was repeated 12 months later and we can see
that another peak of oil occurred after the second treatment. Both Cum Oil vs. Cum Water plot and DCA
enable to quantify the additional oil production. After 14 months of production, the additional oil has been
as high as 37 000 bbl and keeps growing with time.
Figure 9 shows that the WOR and WOR’ plots for M03, which had a tendency of growing up with time,
strongly dropped and level off after the WSO treatments, thus showing better fluid flow repartition which
is more matricial.
SPE-217009-MS 9
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 9—Water Oil Ratio (WOR) and derivative Water Oil Ratio (WOR’) of Well M03 before and after treatments.
Figure 10—Cumulative Oil vs Cumulative Water of Well M03 before and after treatments.
10 SPE-217009-MS
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 11—Incremental Cumulative Oil after treatments for Well M03.
Some wells responded positively to the treatment, but for a limited period of time. This is for example
the case of Well D-04. Cum Oil vs. Cum Water plot (Fig. 12) shows an increase of the slope after WSO
treatment, that lasts 12 months, then the initial trend is seen again. Contrary to Well M-03, a new treatment
did not produce additional oil. For this well, the additional oil production is estimated as 19 000 bbl.
Figure 12—Cumulative Oil vs Cumulative Water of Well D04 before and after treatments.
Finally, a few wells did not respond significantly to the WSO treatment, as seen in Figure 13 for Well
B26. Nevertheless, we have to point out that the treatment did not induce any damage or production loss.
SPE-217009-MS 11
Actually, no significant drop of the gross production was seen for all the treated wells. At worse, the well
keeps its production unchanged, showing that the approach followed is also a low-risk approach.
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Figure 13—Cumulative Oil vs Cumulative Water of Well B26 before and after treatments.
Conclusions
From a successful WSO treatment in 2019 concerning a horizontal well suffering from water channeling
through fractures by an active aquifer, three WSO campaigns have been performed up to September 2022,
with a total number of wells of eleven. All treatments proceeded in the bullhead mode. Main results can
be summarized as follows.
1. The strategy followed in the first treated well has been reproduced for the subsequent treatments. It
consists in injecting three chemical slugs in the following order: Microgel - Gel – Microgel. Such
strategy enables efficient reduction of water influx from the fracture network, while preserving oil
production around the well.
2. Candidate selection was mainly focused on water channeling issues. Chan plots (WOR and WOR’
evolution with time) have been used for that diagnostic.
3. Data set based on Production History curves WOR plots, Cum Oil vs. Cum Water plots and Decline
Curve Analysis enabled evaluation of each treatment in the long term.
4. 75% of the wells have shown a good response to WSO treatment with reduction of water cut and
extra-oil production.
5. Some wells reacted positively but for a limited time. Cum oil plots and DCA enabled to quantify the
additional oil produced during this interval of time.
6. Four wells responded very positively to the treatment, showing additional oil increasing with time
after 12 months. Here again, the quantity of additional oil could be evaluated by Cum Oil and DCA
plots.
7. Re-treatment did not improve well production in a watered out well, but induced a new peak of oil in
a well which produced high additional oil after the first treatment.
12 SPE-217009-MS
8. On the overall from 2019 to 2022 and for an average production time of 18 months per well, the
eleven wells have produced 165,000 bbl of extra oil. This result has been obtained with wells having
a BSW above 90% before the treatment.
Acknowledgment
The authors wish to thank Daleel Petroleum for their permission to publish this paper.
References
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEADIP/proceedings-pdf/23ADIP/4-23ADIP/D041S138R002/3282287/spe-217009-ms.pdf by Remi Maillon on 17 October 2023
Hernando, L., Martin, N., Zaitoun, A., Al Mufargi, H., Al Harthi, H., Al Naabi, A., Al Subhi, K. and Al Harrasi, M.T.:
"Successful water Shutoff Treatment of Fractured Carbonate Horizontal Well Under Aquifer Pressure Support," paper
SPE 203394-MS presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference, 9-12 November 2020.
Moffitt, P.D.: "Long-Term Production Results of Polymer Treatments in Producing Wells in Western Kansas," Journal of
Petroleum Technology, April 1993, 356–362.
Seright R.S. and Liang, J.T.: "A Survey of Field Applications of Gel Treatments for Water Shutoff," paper SPE 26991
presented at the Latin America/Caribean Petroleum Eng. Conference, Buenos Aires, 27-29 April 1994.
Sydansk, R.D. and Seright, R.S.: "When and Where Relative Permeability Modification Water-Shutoff Treatments Can
Be Successfully Applied," SPE Production & Operations, May 2007, 236–245.
Liang, J.T., Lee, R.L. and Seright, R.S.: "Gel placement in Production Wells," SPE Production & Facilities, November
1993, 276–284.
Al-Murayri, M.T., Hassan, I., Alajmi, N., Nesbit, J., Thery, B., Al-Khoury, P., Zaitoun, A., Bouillot, J., Salehi, N., Pitts,
M.J., Wyatt, K. and Dean, E.S.: "Field Implementation of In-Depth Conformance Gel Treatment Prior to Starting an
ASP Flooding Pilot," paper SPE 207850-MS presented at the ADIPEC, Abu Dhabi, 15-18 November 2021.
Al-Murayri, M.T., Hassan, A.A., Alrukaibi, D., Al-Qenae, A., Nesbit, J., Al-Khoury, P., Thery, N., Zaitoun, A., Omonte,
G., Salehi, N., Pitts, M.J., Wyatt, K. and Dean, E.S.: "Design of In-Depth Conformance gel Treatment to De-Risk
ASP Flooding in a Major Carbonate Reservoir," paper SPE 208070-MM presented at the ADIPEC, Abu Dhabi, 15-18
November 2021.
