Brines and Other Workover

Fluids

Purposes
Selection
Filtration needs
Placement
Fluid Loss Control
Cleanup and Displacement of Muds
Limitations
Alternatives

Purposes of Brines
1. Mud displacement prior to cementing;
2. Debris removal;
3. Controlling formation pressures during
completion and intervention operations;
4. Enabling repair operations as a circulating or kill
fluid medium;
5. As packer fluids;

Purposes of Brines (cont.)

6. In some stimulations as base fluids;
7. Enable cleanup of the zone prior to running screens;
8. Reduce friction while running screens & equipment;
9. Avoid damaging the well after completion,
stimulation, or repair;
10. Allow other well operations to be conducted.

Will Circulating a Well Really Clean

It Out?
Not necessarily.
Clean-out efficiency depends on:

Ability to remove the solids from returning fluids;

Fluid hydraulics - the flow rates in every section;
Ability to disperse, then lift solids out of the well;
Ability to effectively remove the dope, mud cake,
residues, etc., from the pipe walls.

Photograph (from Colombia) of cutter run dope,

rust, mud, etc.

Selection of the Brine

Must Satisfy:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Well control at every phase of the operation.

Must be able to filter the brine to 5 to 10 microns
with beta of 1000.
Compatibility with the formation, well equipment and
all operations and fluids.
Corrosion and scale dropout must be controllable.
Cleanup requirements from the formation
Cleanup and disposal requirements at the surface
Cost and availability to fit the well.

Brine Types and Respective Density Ranges

Brine Type
Chloride Salt
Chloride Salt
Chloride Salt
Bromide Salt
Mix
Formate Salt
Formate Salt
Formate Salt
Formate Salt
Formate Salt
Chloride Salt
Bromide Salt
Mix
Bromide Salt
Mix
Mix

Brine Formula
Density Range (ppg)
NaCl
8.4 - 10.0
KCl
8.4 - 9.7
NH4Cl
8.4 - 8.9
NaBr
8.4 - 12.7
NaCl/NaBr
8.4 - 12.5
NaHCO2
8.4 - 11.1
KHCO2
8.4 - 13.3
CsHCO2
13.0 - 20.0
KHCO2/CsHCO2
13.0 - 20.0
NaHCO2/KHCO2
8.4 - 13.1
CaCl2
8.4 - 11.3
CaBr2
8.4 - 15.3
CaCl2/CaBr2
8.4 - 15.1
World Oil, Modern
ZnBr2
12.0 - 21.0
Sand Face Completion,
2003
ZnBr2/CaBr2
12.0 - 19.2
ZnBr2/CaBr2/CaCl2
12.0 - 19.1

Lower Density Fluids

Nitrogen gas
water foam
kerosene and diesel
20o crude
30o crude

0.1 to 2.6 lb/gal

3.5 to 8.3 lb/gal
6.7 to 7.1 lb/gal
7.8 lb/gal
7.3 lb/gal

Most low density fluids are not be usable because of

migration, flash point, or stability issues.

Displacement and Pill Design

must be designed to obtain effective mud
displacement & water wetting of casing.
Keys:

disperse and thin the drilling fluid

compatibility with the drilling fluids
lift out debris and junk
water wet pipe
remove pipe dope
effectively displace the mud
Source: Wellcert

Brines for Displacement

1. A thinning base fluid flush.
2. An effective brine transition system must further thin
and strip the mud and create wellbore displacement.
3. A carrier spacer must sweep out the solids and clean any
coating from the pipe or rock that could cause damage
problems.
4. A separation spacer must do the final cleaning and
separate the residual mud from the brine.
5. The brine must sweep the spacer out. At this point the
well should be clean.

Cleaning and Transition Spacers

Spacer Type

Function

Minimum
Coverage

WBM

OBM

Base Fluid

Thin & mud

condition

250 to 500 ft

Water

Base oil

Transition

Mud to spacer,
cuttings
removal

500 to 1000

Viscous pill

Viscous Pill

Wash

Clean pipe

500 to 1500

Water+ WBM
surfactant

Oil + OBM
surfactant

Separation

Separate WS
from brine,
solids removal

500 to 1000

Viscous pill

Completion
Fluid

Completion
fluid

Fill

Completion
Fluid

Completion
Fluid

Brine Flush Contact Times

9-5/8 casing in 12-1/4 hole, annular area = 0.3 ft2
Pump Rate,
bpm

Annular
Velocity,
ft/min

Barrels
Pumped

Column
Length, ft

Contact
Time,
minutes on
one foot.

150

200

3743

25

10

187

400

7486

40

12

225

400

7486

33

Flow profile in a well with decentralized pipe. Note That most

of the flow comes along the top of the pipe. This affects
cleanup and residence time of the fluid on the wellbore. The
lower section of the wellbore may remain buried in cuttings
and never have contact with any of the circulated fluids.

Major flow area

Displacement of the annulus to displace fluids and mud cake depends

partly on velocity.
The annulus changes as casing replaces the drill string. As the annular
space decreases velocity for any rate increases in the smaller area and
the back pressure on the bottom hole may also increase.

Circulating down the casing and up the

small annulus can produce very high
friction pressure and raised BHP.

Displacement Considerations
Well control is key consideration in selection of
the pill sequence.
In many cases, it is only possible to get thin,
light fluids into turbulence
Pumping fluids to displace oil based fluids
without suitable surfactant/solvent packages to
disperse the mud can result in sludges that are
insoluble except in aggressive solvents
For deep water wells, low temperatures can
impact surfactant effectiveness

Carrying Capacity
Pills in turbulence lose carrying capacity
if the annular velocity drops below that
required for turbulence (e.g. entering the
riser)
In high mud weight, the risk of inducing
barite sag needs to be considered
(displacement pills thin the mud to the
point it can no longer support barite)

LEARNING
As depth and hole angle increase, the minimum
pill volume (based on largest annular hole length)
should increase to allow for contamination, e.g.:
If MD < twice TVD, annular fill length > 80 m (260 ft),
If MD > twice TVD, annular fill length > 125 m (410 ft),

Contact time (time critical points in the well are

exposed to the pill) depends on reaction of
surfactant/solvent to mud. For surfactant pills,
plan for contact times of greater than 4 minutes
for best results.

BEST PRACTICES AND

DESIGN CRITERIA
Good mud thinning fluid is continuous phase of the mud:
for water based mud pumping 50 bbl (8m 3) of water
as the first displacement pill will effectively thin mud,
50 bbl (8m3) of the mud base fluid can be pumped in
the case of oil based muds. (check oil compatibility)
Before any displacement, the compatibly of the spacers
with the mud and the ability to water wet steel surfaces
should be checked at ambient and bottom hole temp to
confirm compatibility.
In deep water, tests at lower temperature will be needed

BEST PRACTICES AND DESIGN

CRITERIA
All tests should be done on field mud samples
to ensure mud is effectively sheared and has
representative particles/cuttings
Water wetting surfactants are generally
effective >3% vol/vol concentration, little
additional benefit is obtained above 10%.
Solvents and mechanical or hydraulic
agitation are required to remove sludges and
pipe dope

Displacement
Displacement of mud from an annulus
is complex. The main driving forces:
time of contact
flow rate and frictional forces
density
mechanical agitation
pipe centralization

RISKS AND ISSUES

Fluid Interfaces area increases w/ hole angle
In deviated wells the eccentricity of the
displacement string reduces displacement.
Rotation and/or reciprocation is needed.
At low temperature (<40oC/104oF), OBM is
very viscous ( synthetic based muds are
worst), circulating to warm the annular
contents reduces the problem.

RISKS AND ISSUES

High circulation rates may be better (even in laminar
flow), they reduce the boundary layer thickness on
the casing wall. (Watch wash-out potential of soft
sands)
Turbulence is best, flow rate must be calculated
allowing for pipe eccentricity. A complete wellbore
hydraulics check is necessary.
High rates (300 ft/min?) may reduce the fluff (80% of
the outer layer of the filter cake that does not
contribute to fluid loss control); sharply reducing the
amount of solids without reducing fluid loss control.

BEST PRACTICES AND DESIGN

CRITERIA
High flow rates will always be better even if
turbulence cannot be achieved
Pipe movement will improve displacement efficiency.
Multi-function circulating subs should be used,
currently the best tools open by setting weight down,
incorporating a clutch mechanism to allow rotation.
Do not stop displacement once pills enter the annulus
Circulate to warm mud and fine up shakers when
possible, condition mud (reduce rheology)
Use reverse circulation if possible when displacing
with lighter fluids

Muds, Cakes, Breakers and Particles

Drilling mud is the best known particulate based fluid
loss control system.
Particles are sized to bridge on the face of the
formation. Carbonate and salt are most common.
Breakers are acid, oxidizers and enzymes.
Filter cakes very effective in preventing losses as long
as over-balance pressure is maintained.
Cakes are very sensitive to swabbing, but are never
completely removed..
Tool systems sensitive to plugging by particulates.

Particles Damage?
Dirty particles, unsized particles, debris and pipe
dope are severe formation damage problems.
Protecting the perforations with the right particles
during a workover improves chances of well
improvement afterwards.
The type of carrier fluid and the gels are v. important
Clear (no particles) brines are not always best solution

Particulate Pill Displacement

A spacer or displacement pill for displacing
a polymer system carring sized particulates
should be 0.2 to 0.25 ppg heavier and about
three times the low shear rate viscosity (at
0.06 sec-1) of the fluid being displaced.

Data from a set of Alaska wells where the perforations were

not protected during a workover. No protection shows
significant long term damage.
PI Change, Perfs Not Protected

1.1 2.1

3.1

11

6 18.9

-40

15

13

-20

% Change in PI

20

0.3 0.5

PI of Wells

40

Short Term PI Change

Long Term PI Change

-60
-80
-100

SPE 26042

When perfs were protected, that was little risk of long term damage.

PI Change After Workover - Perfs Protected

50

PI of wells

40

% Change in PI

30

0.3

1.2

3.1

4.6

8.4

20
10

Short Term PI Change

Long Term PI Change

0
-10

9 10 11

-20
-30
-40

SPE 26042

Sized particulates, particularly those that can be removed, are much less
damaging than most polymers.

Kill Pills: Summary of Overall Effectiveness in

Non Fractured Wells
10

Sized Borate Salts

(4)
Cellulose
Fibers (3)

% Change in PI

HEC Pills

No Pills

0
-5

-10

Sized Sodium
Chloride (12)

No Near Perf
Milling (8)

No Near Perf Milling

(6)

-15

Near Perf Milling or

Scraping (3)

-20
-25

SPE 26042

Near Perf Milling

or Scraping (10)

Formation Damage by Gels

Gels
Linear gels not recommended for high
overbalance or high permeability formations
too much depth of damage.
HEC is not always clean breaking.
Breaker selection is critical to removing the
damage from a linear gel.

Pill Vol. Required, bbl per ft of zone

Linear HEC Pill needed per ft of zone, 80 lb/1000

gal or 3.36 ppb
3
2.5
2

1 Darcy
500 md
250 md
100 md

1.5
1
0.5
0
1000

750

500

Overbalance Pressure, psi

World Oil, Modern

250 Sandface Completion

Practices, 2003

Fluid Loss Rate vs. Pressure Differential for

Various Permeabilities
1 cp fluid,

Loss Rate, bbl / hr / ft of zone height

s = +5
5
4
500 md
250 md
100 md
50md

3
2
1
0
0

100

200

300

Overbalance Pressure, psi

400

500

Modified from World

Oil, Modern Sandface
Completion Practices,
2003

Breaker
Breaker must stay with the part of the gel
that causes the damage
penetrate to the distance that gel penetrates, or
stop at the wall with the gel wall cake.

Breakers:
Acid, internal breaker, or enzyme
Many breakers adsorb or spend in the
formation, before they work.

Brine Stability
The stability of the brines at high salt loadings can
be very touchy with temperature drops causing
salt precipitation.
Increases in temperature decreases brine density and
may leave the brine under-saturated to salt.
Additions of gas, alcohol, some surfactants, shear
and reduction in temperature can lead to salt
precipitation.
Salt may affect the way polymers hydrate or
disperse.

NaCl Brine Density Variance with

Temperature
100o C

20 C

17
16.8
Brine Density (lb/gal)

16.6
16.4
16.2
16
15.8

The reduction of brine

density as it comes to
equilibrium in the well
may explain why a well
can go from a no-flow
condition to flow
within a few hours after
being killed.

15.6
15.4
15.2
15
60

110

160

210
Temperature (F)

260

310

360
SPE 12490

Temperature Changes

Composite data from DTC

Temperatures in the Well?

Circulating or High Rate Injection?

Crystallization Temp

Salt-Out or Freezing Temperature of a Brine

Adding salt lowers

freezing point of water
until the point at which
additional salt precipitates

Eutectic Point

Salt Content

Composition Determines TCT (true

crystallization temperature)

Density

CaCl2

CaBr2

TCT

(ppg)*
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5

(wt %)
34.40
32.20
22.84
00.00

(wt %)
10.80
13.13
20.55
41.55

(OF / OC)
60/ 15.5
44/ 6.7
15/ - 2.8
- 33/ - 36

*1.50 SG

Density Change with Temp

Change
DDH = DS (1 + 0.000252 (TS - TDH))
What is downhole density (DDH) of a 16.4 lb/gal
surface density (Ds) brine (60oF) when downhole
temperature increases to 230oF?
DDH = (16.4) (1 + 0.000252 (60-230)
DDH = 15.7 lb/gal
Formula from OSCA

There is a slight increase in density with applied pressure, usually about

0.1 ppg.
Brine Density Change with Pressure
2.4
Brine Density (g/cc)

2.2

ZnBr2/CaBr2 (19%
/wt)
ZnBr2/CaBr2/CaCl2
(37% /wt)
CaBr2 (45% /wt)

2
1.8
1.6

NaBr (54% /wt)

1.4

CaCl2 (65% /wt)

1.2

NaCl (70% /wt)

Typical change was 0.0015 g/cc

1000

2000

Pressure, psi

3000
SPE 12490

Temperature and Pressure Effects on Completion Fluids

Temp Expansion of Fluids

Expansion Coef.
Fluid System
Diesel
NaCl
CaCl2
NaBr
CaBr2
ZnBr2/CaBr2/CaCl2
ZnBr2/CaBr2

Density, ppg
7
9.49
11.45
12.48
14.3
16.01
19.27

Pressure Effect on Fluids

Compression Coef.
o

vol/vol/ Fx10
lb/gal/100 F
3.8
2.54
0.24
2.39
0.27
2.67
0.33
2.33
0.33
2.27
0.36
2.54
0.48
At 12,000 psi from 76F to 345F

vol/vol/ Fx10

lb/gal/1000 psi

1.98
0.019
1.5
0.017
1.67
0.021
1.53
0.022
1.39
0.022
1.64
0.031
At 198F from 2,000 to 12,000 psi

World Oil, Modern

Sand Face Completion,
2003

Brine Selection Circulating

Density

Match density needs on both static (ESD) needs, and

circulating density (ECD) needs. Consider friction
effects on BH press while circulating.
Remember brine must exert pressures in a window
between controlling pore pressure or shale heaving and
fracturing the formation.
Brine density changes with temperature (can drop by
>1 lb/gal) and a small increase with pressure (0.1
lb/gal).
Carried solids add density to the brine easily by 0.5 to
2+ lb/gal.

Brines have small density changes due to temperature, pressure, and

contamination; and larger density changes due to suspended solids.
CaCl2 Brine in a 14,000 ft
Wellbore in 8,000 ft Water

Hydrostatic Pressure at TVD

BH Pre ssure - (psi)

ESD - (lb/gal)
11.35

Note: Fluid
Density is
Greater at the
Mud line than
at the Surface

11.45

11.50

5000

2000

2000

T ru e V e rtic a l D e p th - (ft)

4000

True Vertical Depth - (ft)

Courtesy of MI-LLC

11.40

6000

8000

10000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

12000

14000

14000

16000

16000

ESD

Pres sure

10000

Adding solids to any fluid, either at the surface or

downhole increases it density. 0.5 to 2+ lb of solids
are common in cleanout with circulated fluids.

Completion Fluid - Checklist

Is the formation liquid sensitive to liquid relative permeability effects?

Compatibility with formation? (clay and minerals)
Compatibility with formation fluid? (emulsion, sludge, foam, froth)
Tanks and surface equipment clean?(pumps, lines, hoses, blenders)
Are polymers breakable? How is breaker added?
Polymers, hydrated, sheared and filtered? Filter level? Beta rating?
Minimize the pipe dope?
Corrosion reactions understood?
Erosion potential understood?

Special Case - Horizontal Wells

Hole circulated to a large volume of fluid to stop
losses.
Minimum amount of solids can be used where
internal tool sticking is a possibility
Suspension of solids beyond 60o deviation is
difficult.
Penetration to furthest reaches of the well is
required buckling considerations?
Very sensitive to swabbing.

Filtration and Cleaning

Brine and ? (tanks, lines, pumps, etc.)
Pickle the tubulars?
NTU or particle count as a measure? How clean is
clean? = Avg pore throat x 0.2?
Beta rating and micron rating important
Tank arrangement when filtering (from dirty tank
to clean, not in a loop)
Filter type
DE or Cartridge (no resin coated cartridges)

Filtration Ratings
NTU - a turbidity indicator - can be mislead by natural
color of water. An NTU of 20 to 30 is generally clean.
Nominal filter rating - estimate of the size of particle
removed - dont trust it. Filtration efficiency improves with
bed build-up
Absolute filter rating - size of the holes in the filter.
Filtration efficiency improves with bed build-up
Beta rating - a ratio of particles before filtration to after. A
good measure of filter efficiency.
Suggestion use a 5 to 10 micron rating with a beta rating
of 1000 for most clear brine applications.

Beta Rating
Beta = number of filter rating and larger
size particles in dirty fluid divided by
number of those particles in clean fluid.
Beta = 1000/1 = 1000 or 99.99% clean

Filtration Considerations
Very clean fluids have high leakoff rates
Fluids with properly blended fluid loss
control materials added after filtration have
a better chance of cleanup than with the
initial particles in the fluid. Particles must
be sized to stop at the face of the formation.
All gelled fluids should be sheared and
filtered even the liquid polymer fluids.

Microgels
or fisheyes
after straining
liquid HEC
dispersion
Solid polymer
lumps or Fisheyes
andamicrogels
filtered
from through
liquid a
200
screen in a shear and filter operation for gravel pack fluid
HECmesh
polymer.
preparation.

Scrapers and Brushes Physically

Cleaning the Well
Available tools
Damage potential

One very detrimental action was running a scraper prior to packer

setting. The scraping and surging drives debris into unprotected
perfs.
Effect of Scraping or Milling Adjacent to Open
Perforations
20
% Change in PI

10

Perfs not protected by

LCM prior to scraping

0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60

Perfs protected
by
2
LCM

Short Term PI Change

Long Term PI Change
SPE 26042

Casing Scraper Designed to

knock off perforation burrs,
lips in tubing pins, cement
and mud sheaths, scale, etc.
It cleans the pipe before
setting a packer or plug.
The debris it turns loose from
the pipe may damage the
formation unless the pay is
protected by a LCM or plug.

Placement Methods
Circulating preferred watch effective circulation density
(friction pressures)
Spotting watch density induced drift 0.05 lb/gal difference
can start density migration.
Bullheading - next to last resort.
Lubricating - last resort.

Consider coiled tubing for most accurate spotting and

ability to circulate fluids into place with minimum
contamination.
Remember that fluid density differences of even 0.05
lb/gal will start density segregation.

Fluid Loss Control

Methods: viscosity, particulates, mechanical
Best method? depends on application and
options afterward.
Viscosity based methods often leave polymer debris
Particulates must be sized with small, medium and
large particles to build a tight cake at the surface. Dont
use them in cased and perforated completions???
Mechanical methods preferred, but not always
practical.

Fluid Loss Control Systems

fluid (pumped)

mechanical

gels (linear and x-link)

downhole valves

bridging particulates

plugs

micron particles
resin particles

flappers (watch the

throat size)
ball checks

larger mixed particles

Removal methods?

Removal methods?

In the Formation / At the

Formation Face (Not in Perf)
Gels high vis. limits the
fluid loss by pressure
drop.
May not work in high perm
(>0.5 darcy).
Temperature greatly affects
performance.
Cleanup is a problem.

Particulates bridge at the

formation face.
Particulates are very effective in controlling fluid loss, but are also very sensitive to
swabbing, dissolving in carrier fluids and must be sized for the formation pores and
natural fractures.

Particulate Systems
Sized carbonates and salts are most common.
Penetration depth = 0.125 (3mm)
Do not use in most perforated completions unless
the perforations have been packed with gravel.
Gravel pack tools and tools with close clearances
should not be exposed to particulate laden fluids.
Gel carriers for particulates still require breakers.

Considerations for Fluid loss

Control Selection
BHT

Formation sensitivity
to treatment fluids

Onshore / Offshore /
Deepwater

BHP

Treatment/completion
fluid types

Rig cost per day

Overbalance or
underbalance

Frequency and amount

of surge/swab loads

Rig equip available

-pumps, tanks, lines,

Vertical and horizontal Formation sand

permeability variations strength

All tubular sizes in the

flow path

Formation sand size

and pore throat size

Sand production and

presence of cavity

Mobilization time
available

Production rate

Producer or injector

Regulations on use and

disposal

Produced fluid types

Wellbore deviation
through the pay

Natural or hydraulic
fractures present
SPE 54323

Areas for Fluid Loss Control

In formation matrix
At the formation face
Inside the perf tunnel
On the fracture pack
Inside the casing (on
the perforation)
On a sand-back plug
In the gravel

Inside the screen

Above the screen or
in the BHA
Inside the tubing
At the surface
Each location requires different
plug construction methods and
removal considerations.

Cleanup
Gel break and damage issues
Fluid imbibition effects
Other fluid unloading issues

Cleanup
How to remove from the reservoir (through the
fractures or the matrix). Is a surface/interfacial
reduction surfactant needed? Is gas needed? Is
the formation initially undersaturated to water
(yes, it can and does happen).
From the wellbore effective unloading is
plagued by well deviation and low flow rates from
small coiled tubing and other non rotating strings.

Problems - unwanted foams

during backflow
Foam is an emulsion where gas is the internal phase
(mist is an emulsion with gas as external phase).
Foams are used to unload brines BUT the forms
may cause a problem at the surface.
Foaming conditions
some oils (ppm conc. of C6-C9organic acids and alcohols)
diesel - (particularly bad and varies from lot to lot)
some acid additives (emulsifiers, salts, inhibitors)
XCD polymers (and others)
Look for and destroy the stabilizer to break the foam.

Brine Tankage Required

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Volume of prod. Casing annulus & below packer?

Displacement volume of work string
Displacement volume of producing string including packers
Volume of manifolds, lines, hoses and pumps
Volume of transport tankage (usable)
Volume of filtering system (all tanks, lines and pods)
Volume of pill tank
Pickle flush volume
Spare volume for safe operation

Special Topics

Alternatives to a clear brine

Gravel pack brines
Brine handling and preparation
Solids free gels
Corrosion
Hydrates
Best Practice Learnings
Toxicity

Alternatives to a Clear Brine

Emulsions, Foams, Muds

Will it be stable?
What will stop fluid loss?
What will clean up or degrade?
What will damage least?
Can an oil be ever be used in a gas zone??

Is mud a viable kill fluid for high

temp and high pressure wells?
How much perm damage does it cause?

Against the formation?

In the perforations?
In a naturally fractured formation?
Against a gravel pack or screen?

Is the damage reversible?

If you have high wellbore pressures, some of
the mud damage is reversible - SOME!

Fluids for Gravel/Frac Pack

Water - low viscosity brines, low molecular
weight salts
HEC - high molecular weight, water soluble
polymer, straight chain
Xanvis - high molecular wt bio polymer,
water soluble. Branched chain, lower
damage than HEC?

Water
Advantages - no mixing, no breakers, high
leakoff, easier to get turbulence
Disadvantages - low gravel carrying
capacity (+/- 2 ppg), more fluid lost,
compatibility problems?

HEC
Advantages: mixes easily??? (still must
shear and filter), easy to break??? (weve
had problems here), commonly available
Disadvantages: lower leakoff rates, lower
sand carrying capacity than bio-polymers

XC
Advantages: shear thinning, higher leakoff,
good carrying capacity
Disadvantages: said to wet some formations
(anionic), x-links with calcium and iron
(water composition more critical), harder to
mix, breaks rapidly above 125oF ?

Brine Handling and Preparation

Brines

HEC

XC

Min Filter Req

5 to 10 mu

10 mu

10mu

Beta rating
Shear Req?
Gravel Conc.
Breaker
Brine Compat?
Leakoff

B=1000
B=10-100
B=10-100
N/A
2 bpm/1200 psi 2 bpm/600
1-5 ppg
1-15 ppg
1-15 ppg
N/A
acid, enz, ox
oxidizers
N/A
<15.5 ppg KCl & NH4Cl
excellent
fair
good

Solids Free Gels

Surfactant gel
Requires clay control (early problems)
Breaks with oil
Not perfect, but generally better than gels.

Breakers for HEC-Gelled Brines

Breaker
HCl
Ammonium hypochlorite
Enzymes
No Breaker Required?

BHT
130 to 200F
130 to 200F
below 130 F
Above 200 F?

Corrosivity
In oxygen free environment, CaCl2/CaBr brines
exhibit very low corrosion rates if the pH is kept
between 7 and 10.
Lime and magnesium oxide are used to increase the
pH of the brines.
Use of sulfite oxygen scavengers in large
concentrations can potentially cause CaSO 4 precip.
Use other methods.
Biocide may not be needed in more concentrated
brines.

Corrosion From Brines example from Materials,

Corrosion and Inspection: http://upstream.bpweb.bp.com/mci/default.asp
Material

General
Corrosion

Low Alloy Steel

13 Chrome

Super Cr 13, etc.

Pitting/Crevice
Corrosion

SSC

CL SCC

Relative
Failure Risk

Low

Low/Med

High

Alloy 450

Med

17-4PH

High

Duplex Stainless

High

Austenitic

High

Super Austenitic

Low

Ni Alloys

Low

HPHT Production Operations, March 16, 2005, EPTG, BP

11

Hydrates and Freezing

Sea floor temperatures
Gas expansion cooling
Is the brine naturally hydrate formation
resistant?
Is it tolerant of antifreeze?

Dense Brines Inhibit Hydrates

Hydrate inhibition by CaCl2 Brine

120.0

Hydrate Formation Temp F

100.0

Hydrate equilibrium
pressure for pure water
calculated using

80.0

CSMHYD, VK 917 gas

15 kpsi
10 kpsi
5 kpsi
2.5 kpsi

60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0

Maybe

Solvent Needed
8.3

8.5

8.7

8.9

9.1

9.3

9.5

9.7

9.9

10.1

10.3

-20.0
-40.0
Brine Density lb/gal

10.5

Safe
10.7

10.9

11.1

11.3

11.5

11.7

LEARNINGS
Proper disposal required for all chemicals.
Mixed displacement pills and mud have to be
separated from the mud and packer fluid for
disposal (zero discharge issues)
Brine/Water/Acid pumped without
surfactants/solvents to displace oil muds (e.g. for
an inflow test) prior to clean up can form sludges,
these will not be broken down by subsequent clean
up pills
Clean up pills containing surfactants can foam
during mixing (particularly when put through a
hopper) and during flowback.

Viscosifier Learnings
XCD/ biozan are preferred for mixing viscous pills
but do not work in calcium brines,
HEC will not support solids.
Polymers should be checked for suitability at the
anticipated temperature (thermal thinning an
issue particularly >135oC/275oF).

LEARNING
The use of a circulating sub to allow high flow rates is
recommended.
As steel surfaces water wet, pipe rotation may not be
possible due to friction and displacement of solids becomes
much more difficult.
Displacement must exceed solids settling rate and (e.g. 0.18
ft/sec for 40/60 mesh sand in water) not stop once pills are in
the annulus.
Displacement optimized for smallest production casing ID can
leave bypassed mud in larger ODs for tapered casing strings.
Reverse circulation is most effective if packer fluid is lighter
than mud (watch bridging potential)

Many Brines are Sensitive to

Temperature When Viscosified
Brine type sensitive NaCl to ZnCl
Temperature sensitivity is also affected by
concentration
Liquid vs. dry polymer makes a difference.

Stability of Dry HEC in Socium Chloride

260
Precipitation, Separation or Lost Viscosity

Temperature, F

240
Transition Zone

220
200

HEC Active and Soluble

180
160
140
8.6

8.8

9.2

9.4

9.6

9.8

Sodium Chloride Density, ppg

10
SPE 58728

10.2

Liquid HEC in Zinc Based Brines

260
240

Temperature, F

220

Transition Zone

200
180

HEC Active and Soluble

160
140
120
100
15

16

17

18

Zinc Brine Density, ppg

19

20
SPE 58728

Brief toxicity data for standard test organisms .

Species

Algae
Invertibrates
Fish

SPE 27143

Acute Toxic Threshold Concentration (mg/l)

Zinc
Cesium Potassium
Sodium
bromide
formate
formate
formate
0.32
1600
3700
2000
1.6

340

300

3900

260

1700

6100