The present invention relates generally to reactive shaped charges used in the oil and gas industry to explosively perforate well casing and underground hydrocarbon bearing formations, and more particularly to an improved method for explosively perforating a well casing and its surrounding underground hydrocarbon bearing formation while enhancing the efficacy of dynamic underbalanced systems and reducing overall shot density and cost.
Wellbores are typically completed with a cemented casing across the formation of interest to assure borehole integrity and allow selective injection into and/or production of fluids from specific intervals within the formation. It is necessary to perforate this casing across the interval(s) of interest to permit the ingress or egress of fluids. Several methods are applied to perforate the casing, including mechanical cutting, hydro-jetting, bullet guns and shaped charges. The preferred solution in most cases is shaped charge perforation because a large number of holes can be created simultaneously, at relatively low cost. Furthermore, the depth of penetration into the formation is sufficient to bypass near-wellbore permeability reduction caused by the invasion of incompatible fluids during drilling and completion.
Perforation using shaped explosive charges is inevitably a violent event, resulting in plastic deformation of the penetrated rock, grain fracturing, and the compaction of particulate debris (casing material, cement, rock fragments, shaped charge fragments) into the pore throats of rock surrounding the tunnel. Thus, while perforating guns do enable fluid production from hydrocarbon bearing formations, the effectiveness of traditional perforating guns is limited by the fact that the firing of a perforating gun leaves debris 22 inside the perforation tunnel and the wall of the tunnel. Moreover, the compaction of particulate debris into the surrounding pore throats results in a zone 26 of reduced permeability (disturbed rock) around the perforation tunnel commonly known as the “crushed zone.” The crushed zone 26, though only about one quarter inch thick around the tunnel, detrimentally affects the inflow and/or outflow potential of the tunnel (commonly known as a “skin” effect.) Plastic deformation of the rock also results in a semi-permanent zone of increased stress 28 around the tunnel, known as a “stress cage”, which further impairs fracture initiation from the tunnel. The compacted mass of debris left at the tip of the tunnel is typically very hard and almost impermeable, further reducing the inflow and/or outflow potential of the tunnel and the effective tunnel depth (also known as clear tunnel depth).
The distance a perforated tunnel extends into the surrounding formation, commonly referred to as total penetration, is a function of the explosive weight of the shaped charge; the size, weight, and grade of the casing; the prevailing formation strength; and the effective stress acting on the formation at the time of perforating. Effective penetration is the fraction of the total penetration that contributes to the inflow or outflow of fluids. This is determined by the amount of compacted debris left in the tunnel after the perforating event is completed. The effective penetration may vary significantly from perforation to perforation. Currently, there is no means of measuring it in the borehole. Darcy's law relates fluid flow through a porous medium to permeability and other variables, and is represented by the equation seen below.
Where: q=flowrate, k=permeability, h=reservoir height, pe=pressure at the reservoir boundary, pw=pressure at the wellbore, t=fluid viscosity, re=radius of the reservoir boundary, rw=radius of the wellbore, and S=skin factor.
The effective penetration determines the effective wellbore radius, rw, an important term in the Darcy equation for radial inflow. This becomes even more significant when near-wellbore formation damage has occurred during the drilling and completion process, for example, resulting from mud filtrate invasion. If the effective penetration is less than the depth of the invasion, fluid flow can be seriously impaired.
To minimize perforating damage and optimize production of a tunnel, current procedures to clear debris from tunnels rely on applying a relatively large pressure differential between the formation and the wellbore, or underbalance, wherein the formation pressure is greater than the wellbore pressure. These methods attempt to enhance tunnel cleanout by controlling the static and dynamic pressure behavior within the wellbore prior to, during and immediately following the perforating event so that a pressure gradient is maintained from the formation toward the wellbore, inducing tensile failure of the damaged rock around the tunnel and a surge of flow to transport debris from the perforation tunnels into the wellbore.
Thus, in a number of situations, it is difficult or even impossible to create a sufficient pressure gradient between the formation and the wellbore. For example, in heterogeneous formations—where rock properties such as hardness and permeability vary significantly within the perforation interval—and in formations of high-strength, high effective stress and/or low natural permeability, underbalanced techniques become increasingly less effective. Since all the tunnels are being cleaned up in parallel by a common pressure sink, perforations shot into zones of relatively higher permeability will preferentially flow and clean up, eliminating the pressure gradient before perforations shot into poorer rock are able to flow. Since the maximum pressure gradient is limited by the difference between the reservoir pressure and the minimum hydrostatic pressure that can be achieved in the wellbore, perforations shot into low permeability rock may never experience sufficient surge flow to clean up. In such circumstances the perforation efficiency may be as low as 10% of the total holes perforated.
To solve these problems, methods have been developed for creating a dynamic underbalance around the gun immediately after creating perforated tunnels. For, example, U.S. Pat. No. 7,121,340 discloses a pressure reducer positioned adjacent to a perforating gun for reducing post-detonation pressure within the gun to enhance the dynamic underbalance effect within the gun and cause well-bore fluid to flow into the gun. U.S. Pat. No. 6,732,298 uses a porous solid around a perforation gun, which is crushed when the gun is detonated to produce a new volume into which wellbore fluids can flow, thereby enhancing the transient pressure around the gun. Others take advantage of the volume within the gun to create a dynamic underbalance. However, this generally calls for a reduction in the number of shaped charges within the gun and therefore, a reduction in shot density and an increased risk of low perforation efficiency. Low perforation efficiency, inadequately cleaned tunnels and/or insufficient shot density limits the overall inflow and/or outflow potential of the well and the area through which fluids can flow, causing increased pressure drop and erosion and impairing fracture initiation and propagation. Consequently, there is a need for a method of creating dynamic underbalance while ensuring that substantially every charge effectively produces and substantially clears a tunnel.
Accordingly, the present invention provides a method of reducing the effects experienced when using conventional perforators in heterogeneous formations. In particular, the proposed method allows for the enhancement of a dynamic underbalance effect without a decrease in overall perforation efficiency by using reactive shaped charges within the charge carrier of a perforation gun. Thus, it provides an improved method for reducing the shot density to create a dynamic underbalance while delivering a greater overall number of effective perforations. Despite reducing the number of charges within the gun, and allowing a reduction in shot density, effective shot density is not compromised. Moreover, the propensity for gun swell is reduced thereby reducing the risk of difficulty retrieving spent guns from the wellbore. In addition, the method proposed herein achieves a superior inflow and outflow performance compared to that achieved with conventional shaped charges under the same perforating conditions. It further enhances the parameters and effects of injection to enhance and stimulate the production of oil and gas.
A more complete understanding of the method and apparatus of the present invention may be had by reference to the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
Where used in the various figures of the drawing, the same numerals designate the same or similar parts. Furthermore, when the terms “top,” “bottom,” “first,” “second,” “upper,” “lower,” “height,” “width,” “length,” “end,” “side,” “horizontal,” “vertical,” and similar terms are used herein, it should be understood that these terms have reference only to the structure shown in the drawing and are utilized only to facilitate describing the invention.
All figures are drawn for ease of explanation of the basic teachings of the present invention only; the extensions of the figures with respect to number, position, relationship, and dimensions of the parts to form the preferred embodiment will be explained or will be within the skill of the art after the following teachings of the present invention have been read and understood. Further, the exact dimensions and dimensional proportions to conform to specific force, weight, strength, and similar requirements will likewise be within the skill of the art after the following teachings of the present invention have been read and understood.
The present invention provides an improved method for the perforation of a wellbore and the creation of a local dynamic underbalance effect within a charge carrier without comprising shot density. In adjusting the free volume of the gun to create a dynamic underbalance, there is a trade off between cleaning out the debris from within a perforated tunnel and a reduction in the total number of holes perforated. In order to maximize the sustained dynamic underbalance pressure within and around a perforating gun, the free gun volume must be increased, resulting in less total shots into the formation. That is, by reducing the number of shaped charges loaded within a perforating gun from the normal fully-loaded amount, an enhanced dynamic underbalance effect is achieved. By using reactive shaped charges, the present invention allows for the use of fewer charges (to enhance dynamic underbalance effects) and yet reduces the risk of low perforation efficiency. By induction of a second explosive event, reaction or release of energy immediately following detonation of a shaped charge, improved perforation efficiency and tunnel cleanout is achieved. Moreover, subsequent elimination of the crushed zone and relief of the stress cage surrounding the perforation tunnel is achieved. In further embodiments, by constructing the gun carrier of lighter grade steel or with a thinner wall thickness, the weight and cost of the gun carrier is reduced.
Generally, the improved method for perforating a well for the enhancement of dynamic underbalance in a perforating system, depicted in
The internal volume of the carrier 14 is manipulated such that reactive shaped charges are introduced and yet the free internal gun volume Vgun int remains greater than that of a fully loaded carrier. Thus, in one embodiment, at least one reactive shaped charge per unit length is introduced into a hollow charge carrier or, in an alternate embodiment, at least one reactive shaped charge per unit length is removed from a fully loaded charge carrier. Regardless of how the free volume is manipulated or how the number of reactive shaped charges is adjusted, so long as the Vgun int remains greater than the volume of a fully loaded carrier (i.e., the charge carrier is only partially loaded), the present invention sustains an enhanced dynamic underbalance while shot density remains uncompromised.
In general, the larger the gun system, the more pronounced and sustained a dynamic underbalance effect becomes. Dynamic underbalance enhances the effectiveness of underbalanced perforating by prolonging the period during which flow is introduced from the formation, and by distributing the pressure drop more effectively across the perforated interval. By using reactive shaped charges, an improved effect is gained, which aids in overcoming limitations imposed in certain situations such as insufficient formation permeability or reservoir pressure.
Without being bounded by theory,
In prior art fully-loaded systems, which load the carrier with conventional charges, about 5-12 shaped charges per foot are deployed within a gun in an underbalanced system in order to achieve 1-6 effectively clean perforations per foot of gun in a rock formation, assuming typical 20-50% perforation efficiency. Typically, shot density is reduced by one to two shots per foot, or 15-20%. In contrast, by using reactive shaped charges, the second explosive event within a perforated tunnel effectively expels a substantial portion of debris from the tunnel, offsetting any risk of low perforation efficiency. Consequently, the second explosive event, reaction or release of energy, which is triggered by detonation of the reactive shaped charge in any number of ways, as discussed further below, decreases the risk of inefficient perforations seen with prior art charges.
An explosive event is meant to refer to a reaction that energy or heat including without limitation a reaction caused by one or more powders used for blasting, any chemical compounds, whether alone or in combination as a produced or formed mixture, and/or any other detonating agents, such as a reactive shaped charge. Detonation can be caused by ignition by fire, heat, electrical sparks, friction, percussion, concussion, or by detonation of the compound, mixture, device or any part thereof. The second explosive event remains substantially contained within each, individual perforated tunnel; thus, it may also be referred to as a “local” explosive event. In one embodiment, the second explosive event is a highly exothermic reaction. In one embodiment, the second explosive event is triggered by inducing one or more strong exothermic reactive effects to generate near-instantaneous overpressure within and around a tunnel. In one embodiment, the second explosive event is brought about by exploiting chemical reactions. In one embodiment, a chemical reaction between a metal within a charge carrier or perforation gun and an element within the formation is used to create an exothermic reaction within and around a perforation tunnel after detonation of a perforating gun. In one embodiment, the second explosive event occurs within 100 microseconds following detonation of the reactive shaped charge. In another embodiment, the second explosive event takes place within 200-300 microseconds following detonation of the reactive shaped charge. In either embodiment, the second explosive event occurs immediately after substantially complete formation of one or more perforation tunnels as a result of the first explosive event, or detonation of the reactive shaped charges.
In preferred embodiments, reactive effects are produced by reactive shaped charges having a liner manufactured partly or entirely from materials that will react inside the perforation tunnel, either in isolation, with each other, or with components of the formation. In one embodiment, the reactive shaped charges comprise a liner that contains a metal, which is propelled by a high explosive, projecting the metal in its molten state into the perforation created by the shaped charge jet. The molten metal is then forced to react with water that also enters the perforation, creating a reaction locally within the perforation. In another embodiment, the shaped charges comprise a liner having a controlled amount of bimetallic composition that undergoes an exothermic intermetallic reaction. In another embodiment, the liner is comprised of one or more metals that combine to produce an exothermic reaction after detonation.
Reactive shaped charges suitable for the present invention, for example, are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,393,423 to Liu and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0056462 to Bates et al., the technical disclosures of which are both hereby incorporated herein by reference. Liu discloses shaped charges having a liner that contains aluminum, propelled by a high explosive such as RDX or its mixture with aluminum powder. Another shaped charge disclosed by Liu comprises a liner of energetic material such as a mixture of aluminum powder and a metal oxide. Thus, the detonation of high explosives or the combustion of the fuel-oxidizer mixture creates a first explosion, which propels aluminum in its molten state into the perforation to induce a secondary aluminum-water reaction. Bates et al. disclose a reactive shaped charge made of a reactive liner made of at least one metal and one non-metal, or at least two metals that form an intermetallic reaction. Typically, the non-metal is a metal oxide or any non-metal from Group III or Group IV, while the metal is selected from Al, Ce, Li, Mg, Mo, Ni, Nb, Pb, Pd, Ta, Ti, Zn, or Zr. After detonation, the components of the metallic liner react to produce a large amount of energy.
By way of example and without limiting the scope of the present invention, Table 1 below indicates the amount of empty (i.e., free) internal gun volume in various fully loaded systems. Shots per foot (SPF) refer to the number of shaped charges that can be mounted in a perforating gun in a given foot. For each charge that is introduced into the system, the free gun volume will decrease by some significant fraction of the volume described per individual charge. By the same manner, for each charge that is removed from a fully-loaded system, the free gun volume will increase by some significant fraction of the volume described per each individual charge. Volume associated with internal components used to support the charge cannot be entirely recovered.
As shown in Table 1, a typical gun having an outside diameter of 4½ inches, loaded with five 39-gram charges per linear foot of gun will have a remaining free volume around the charges and associated supporting members of about 100 cubic inches per linear foot of gun. The removal of one shaped charge per foot adds more than 200 cubic inches of free volume, or between 200 and 250 cubic inches of free volume, thereby substantially enhancing the dynamic underbalance effect created by the system. Thus, removal of shaped charges, adds more free volume, or simply inclusion of less charges results in more free volume. In one embodiment, for example, utilizing a perforation gun providing 5 SPF, provides for an additional approximate 200 in3/foot when only 4 shots per foot are utilized in the charge carrier; an additional approximate 400 in3/foot when only 3 shots per foot are utilized in the carrier; and an additional approximate 600 in3/foot when only 2 shots per foot are used. Further embodiments from the table above can be similarly determined.
Unlike conventional dynamic underbalance methods, there is no penalty or reduction of overall perforation efficiency from the removal of explosive charges. Since every shaped charge independently conveys a discrete quantity of reactive material into its tunnel, the cleanup of any particular tunnel is not affected by the others. The effectiveness of cleanup is thus independent of the prevailing rock lithology or permeability at the point of penetration.
In further embodiments, the weight of the perforating system can also be adjusted to an optimal weight, that is, one that is as light as possible without exceeding limits on swelling or causing gun failure. For example, most high performance guns are manufactured from high yield specialty steels such as G-130, G-135, or G-140. In one embodiment, a perforation gun is constructed of a lighter weight grade steel such as P-110. In another embodiment, the wall thickness of the gun is reduced. The specific values of initial wall thickness and selection of the steel will be system specific and will vary depending upon the amount of pressure rating and required gun swell. One skilled in the art, armed with this disclosure, can adjust these specific values based upon such factors as formation and wellbore pressures.
In addition, the propensity of the perforating gun to swell or split after detonation of the shaped charges conveyed therein is reduced by running fewer charges, lowering the risk of encountering problems when retrieving the spent gun. There is thus a significant advantage to be gained from this system, wherein one or more shaped charges can be removed or less charges can be used within a perforation gun without sacrificing the effective shot density created by the system. The shot density of a perforating gun system may be varied by adjusting the number of shaped charges within any given distance.
The improved method for perforating a wellbore described herein optimizes gun weight, enhances dynamic underbalance, and stimulates oil and gas production. Substantially eliminating the crushed zone around the perforation tunnels created by a perforating gun produces a much higher percentage of unobstructed tunnels with unimpaired tunnel walls in comparison to conventional methods; theoretically approaching 100% perforation efficiency. Consequently, as already discussed, fewer charges can be introduced into the charge carrier (i.e., the number of shaped charges within the perforating gun can be reduced) to create an enhanced method of achieving dynamic underbalance while delivering an effective shot density equivalent to or greater than that of a fully loaded perforating gun of conventional design.
By eliminating a substantial portion of the crushed zone, reactive perforators yield a number of benefits for oil and gas production. This includes a very high percentage of unobstructed tunnels with unimpaired tunnel walls, which results in: an increased rate of injection or production at a given pressure condition; a reduced injection pressure at a given injection rate; a reduced injection or production rate per open perforation (less erosion); an improved distribution of injected or produced fluids across the perforated interval; a reduced propensity for catastrophic loss of injectivity or productivity due to solids bridging (screen out) during long periods of production, slurry disposal or during proppant-bearing stages of an hydraulic fracture stimulation; the minimization of near-wellbore pressure losses; and an improved predictability of the inflow or outflow area created by a given number of shaped charges (of specific value to limited entry perforation for outflow distribution control).
Even though the figures described above have depicted all of the explosive charges as having uniform size, it is understood by those skilled in the art that, depending on the specific application, it may be desirable to have different sized explosive charges in the perforating system. It is also understood by those skilled in the art that several variations can be made in the foregoing without departing from the scope of the invention. For example, the particular location of the explosive charges can be varied within the scope of the invention. Also, the particular techniques that can be used to fire the explosive charges within the scope of the invention are conventional in the industry and understood by those skilled in the art.
It will now be evident to those skilled in the art that there has been described herein an improved perforating method that reduces the amount of debris left in the perforations in the hydrocarbon bearing formation after the perforating gun is fired, increases overall perforation efficiency and enhances dynamic underbalance within and around the perforating gun. Although the invention hereof has been described by way of preferred embodiments, it will be evident that other adaptations and modifications can be employed without departing from the spirit and scope thereof. The terms and expressions employed herein have been used as terms of description and not of limitation; and thus, there is no intent of excluding equivalents, but on the contrary it is intended to cover any and all equivalents that may be employed without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
This application claims priority to provisional application Ser. No. 61/118,997, filed Dec. 1, 2008.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3235005 | Delacour | Feb 1966 | A |
3983941 | Fitch | Oct 1976 | A |
4078612 | Gallus | Mar 1978 | A |
4107057 | Dill et al. | Aug 1978 | A |
4220205 | Coursen et al. | Sep 1980 | A |
4372384 | Kinney | Feb 1983 | A |
4436155 | Brieger | Mar 1984 | A |
5318128 | Johnson et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
6732298 | Murthy et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6962203 | Funchess | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7036594 | Walton et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7121340 | Grove et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7393423 | Liu | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7712416 | Pratt et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
20020020535 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20030037692 | Liu | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030089498 | Johnson et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20040089449 | Walton et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20050115448 | Pratt et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20060266551 | Yang et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070056462 | Bates et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20080105430 | Cuthill | May 2008 | A1 |
20080271894 | Hill et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20100132945 | Bell et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100132946 | Bell et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20120018156 | Grove et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Entry for “homogeneous formation” from the Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary, accessed Jun. 8, 2012 via www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com. |
GEODynamics Engineered Perforating Solutions, 2009 GEODynamics Inc., Client Spotlight, Jul. 2009. |
GEODynamics Engineered Perforating Solutions, 2008.10 GEODynamics, Inc., CONNEX Perforating, ReActive Perforating Technology. |
Bell, Hardesty, and Clark, “Reactive Perforating: Conventional and Unconventional Applications, Learnings, and Opportunities,” SPE 122174, 2009 Society of Petroleum Engineers, May 27, 2009. |
Bell and Cuthill, “Next-Generation Perforating System Enhances the Testing and Treatment of Fracture Stimulated Wells in Canada,” SPE 116226, 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Sep. 21, 2008. |
Denney, “Technology Applications,” JPT Online, Jul. 2007, located at http://www.spe.org/spe-app/spe/jpt/2007/07/TechApps.htm, downloaded Nov. 28, 2009. |
Wade et al. “Field Tests Indicate New Perforating Devices Improve Efficiency in Casing Completion Operations” Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. Oct. 1962, pp. 1069-1073. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100133005 A1 | Jun 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61118997 | Dec 2008 | US |