Tab 6 F_ Sandstone Acidizing Chem and Design
Short Description
Sandstone acidizing technique...
Description
Sandstone Acidizing
Outline • • • • • • • •
Sandstone vs. Carbonate Sandstone composition Mineral surface area Reaction of HF with silicates Design methodology Fluid selection Mud Acid, Clay Acid and Organic Clay Acid. Avoid problems Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
2
1
Objectives • • • • • • • • • • • •
Describe the sandstone acidizing process. List the key components in sandstones. State the importance of mineral surface area. Describe the primary, 2nd and tertiary reactions of mud acid with clay. State the major components of spent mud acid. List the incompatible ions with spent mud acid and state why they are incompatible. State the problems associated with illite and chlorite. State the purpose of the each sandstone treatment stage. Describe the fluid selection process. Describe when/why Mud Acid, Clay Acid and OCA are used. Describe Mud Acid, Clay Acid and OCA treatment designs and how they are different. State how to avoid potential problems during a treatment. Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
3
Carbonate vs. Sandstone SANDSTONE • Dissolution of the damaging mineral
CARBONATE • A large fraction of the matrix is soluble (>50%)
• A small fraction of the matrix is dissolved
• Dissolution of rock (wormholes) – damage bypass
• Potential precipitation
• Diversion
•Treatment of sandstone with high calcite content (>20%): – Use carbonate design methodology – Use sandstone diversion techniques – Iron control may be a problem Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
4
2
Sandstone Constituents Secondary Cement (Carbonate Quartz)
Quartz
Clays (Pore lining i.e., illite)
*Feldspars
Clays (Pore filling i.e., Kaolinite)
*Chert *Mica
Remaining Pore Space
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
5
Formation Minerals - Silicates Minerals
Chemical Composition
Quartz Quartz
Quartz Quartz
Si0 Si022
Feldspars Feldspars
Orthoclase Orthoclase Microcline Microcline
KAlSi KAlSi33OO88 KAlSi KAlSi3OO8
Albite Albite Plagioclase Plagioclase
Micas Micas Clays Clays
3
8
NaSi NaSi33AlO AlO88 Si Si2-3Al Al1-2OO8(Na,Ca) (Na,Ca) 2-3
1-2
8
Biotite Biotite Muscovite Muscovite
(AlSi (AlSi33OO1010))K(Mg, K(Mg,Fe) Fe)33(OH) (OH)22 (AlSi O ) K(Al) OH) (AlSi3 O10 ) K(Al)2 OH)2
Chlorite Chlorite Kaolinite Kaolinite
+2 +3 (Mg, (Mg,Fe Fe+2, ,Fe Fe+3))66Si Si33AlO AlO1010(OH) (OH)88 Al (Si O )(OH) Al4 (Si4 O10 )(OH)8
Smectite Smectite MixedMixed MixedLayer Mixed--Layer
(AlSi (AlSi33OO1010)Mg )Mg55(Al,Fe)(OH) (Al,Fe)(OH)88 Illite Kaolinite, Kaolinite, Illiteor orChlorite Chloritewith withSmectite Smectite
Illite Illite
3
4
4
10
10
2
2
8
Si Si33AlO AlO1010(OH) (OH)22KAl KAl22
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
6
3
Formation Minerals Minerals Carbonates
Sulfates
Others
Chemical Composition
Calcite
CaCO3
Dolomite
Ca, Mg(CO3)2
Ankerite
Ca,(Mg,Fe)(CO 3) 2
Siderite
FeCO 3
Gypsum
CaSO4·2H 2O
Anhydrite
CaSO4
Halite Iron Oxides
NaCl
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
7
Reaction Rate - Factors • Mineral Composition & Surface Area • Dominant Factor « Surface Area Mineral
Specific Area
Quartz
Few cm2/g
Feldspar
Few cm2/g
Clays:
Kaolinite
22 m2/g
Illite
113 m2/g
Smectite
82 m2/g
• Reaction Rate: Clays > Feldspars > Quartz Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
8
4
Mud Acids: HCl – HF • Hydrochloric wt% + Hydrofluoric wt%
12 – 3, 12 – 2 13.5 – 1.5 9 –1.5, 9 – 1 6 –1.5, 6 - 1 4.5 – 0.5
• Siliceous minerals Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
9
Reaction of Mud Acid (HCl – HF) with Clay +
HF
+
Na or K Primary (5+x) HF + MM-AlAl-Si + (3(3-x+1) H + = HSiF5 + AlFx(3(3--x)+ + M+ + 2H 2O
Clay Spent HF
Secondary X/5 HSiF5 + M-Al-Si + (3-x+1) H+ + H2O =
Si(OH)4
AlFx(3-x)+ + M+ + Si(OH)4 Tertiary AlF2+ + M-Al-Si + (3-x+1) H+ + H2O =
AlF2+ Si(OH) Si(OH) Si(OH)
2AlF2+ + M+ + Si(OH)4 Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
10
5
Precautions to Avoid Precipitates • Potassium fluosilicates K2SiF6 AVOID CONTACT WITH K, Na, Ca
•Calcium fluoride CaF2 •REMOVE CALCITE
•Aluminum fluoride AlF3 MAINTAIN A LOW pH Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
11
Hydrated/Amorphous Silica: Cannot Avoid
Si(OH)4
Al
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
12
6
Former Site of Kaolinite Following Mud Acid Treatment
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
13
Design Methodology to Maximize Stimulation
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
14
7
Sandstone Acidizing Fluid Stages
Pre-acid Preflush: Overflush: Displaces spent acid away from the critical matrix. Diverter: Preflush: Main Fluid: NH Cl brine or displaces water containing Decreases fluidtoluene/xylene flow thief zone/s and increases flowdamage into HCl organic acid) removes CaCO matrix to prevent the Mud acid removes siltinto andthe clay (alumino-silicate) formation 4 (or 3 from + + ++ incompatible cations (Na , K , Ca ) away from the wellbore. other non-treated zones. precipitation of CaF . 2
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
15
Sandstone Acidizing Fluid Stages
1. Pre-acid Preflush: NH4Cl brine or toluene/xylene displaces water containing incompatible cations (Na+, K+, Ca++) away from the wellbore. 2. Preflush: HCl (or organic acid) removes CaCO3 from matrix to prevent the precipitation of CaF2. 3. Main Fluid: Mud acid (HCl – HF) removes silt and clay (aluminosilicate) formation damage 4. Overflush: Displaces spent acid away from the critical matrix. 5. Diverter: Decreases fluid flow into the thief zone/s and increases flow into other non-treated zones. Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
16
8
Sandstone Acidizing Fluid Selection
Matrix Treatment Design Methodology • • • • • • • •
Candidate Selection Establish Nature and Location of Damage Treating Fluid/Additive Selection Determine Pressure/Injection Rate Establish Fluid Volumes Develop Pumping Schedule and Placement Strategy Define Shut-in/Cleanup Stages Economics Assess Productivity and Profitability Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
18
9
Fluids Available •
Hydrochloric acid – Preflush – Main acid component – Overflush
•
Hydrofluoric acid systems – Mud Acid – Organic Mud Acid – Fluoboric Acid (Clay Acid) – Organic Fluoboric Acid (OCA)
•
Organic Acids – Formic – Acetic – Citric
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
19
Selection Criteria • Formation mineralogy – Reactivity • Chemical composition • Surface area – Rock Structure • HCl solubility • Clay distribution – Sensitivity • Deconsolidation • Precipitation • Fines release
• Permeability – Type of damage – Mobility of induced damage • Produced Fluids – Oil wells: Sludge/Emulsions – Gas wells: Water saturation • Temperature – Corrosion – Penetration • Bottomhole pressure
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
20
10
Pre-Acid Preflush • Ammonium chloride (NH4Cl) • Guideline – – – –
Formation Brine
3 wt% (15%)
• Calculated Concentration = 3% + – – – – –
(% Smectite + % Mixed Layer*0.5)*0.3) + (% Illite+ % Mixed Layer*0.5)*0.12) + % Kaolinite*0.08 + % Chlorite*0.12 + % Feldspar*0.05)
HCl
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
21
HCl Preflush/Overflush HCl Fluid Selection Guide for All Temperatures >100 md
20-100 md
10% clay
13.5 - 1.5
9- 1
4.5 - .5
> 10%silt and < 10% clay
12 - 2
9 - 1.5
6- 1
< 10%silt and > 10% clay
12 - 2
9 - 1.5
6- 1
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
31
Mud Acid Guidelines for Reservoirs with < 2% Zeolites* < 10% Silt and 10% Silt and >10% Clay Other
> 20 md 8% HCl/2% HF with 5% Acetic 9% HCl/1% HF with 5% Acetic 9% HCl/1.5% HF with 5% Acetic
< 20 md 6% HCl/1.5% HF with 5% Acetic 4.5% HCl/0.5% HF with 5% Acetic 6% HCl/1.5% HF with 5% Acetic
Mud Acid Guidelines for Reservoirs with 2 -5% Zeolites* All Silt and Clay Ranges
> 20 md OCA
< 20 md OCA
Mud Acid Guidelines for Reservoirs with >5% Zeolites* All Silt and Clay Ranges
> 20 md OCA HT
< 20 md OCA HT
*10% Acetic Acid PF/OF and use OCA when fines migration is a problem.
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
32
16
Mud Acid Guidelines for Reservoirs with < 3 Chlorite/Glauconite > 20 md
< 20 md
6% HCl/1.5% HF
6% HCl/1.5% HF
> 10% Silt and >10% Clay
4.5% HCl/0.5% HF
4.5% HCl/0.5% HF
Other
6% HCl/1% HF
6% HCl/1% HF
< 10% Silt and 20 md
< 20 md
< 10% Silt and 10% Silt and >10% Clay
9% HCl/1% HF with 5% Acetic
4.5% HCl/0.5% HF with 5% Acetic
Other
9% HCl/1.5% HF with 5% Acetic
6% HCl/1% HF with 5% Acetic
Mud Acid Guidelines for Reservoirs with >6% Chlorite/Glauconite* All Silt and Clay Ranges
> 20 md
< 20 md
OCA
OCA
* 10% Acetic Acid PF/OF
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
33
Clay Instability in HCl All clays have a temperature at which they become unstable in HCl. Unstable clays decompose quickly, consume HCl and can migrate.
Max. T in HCl (deg F) Short Berea CoreMud #2: Acid 12-3 Mud Acid Test @ 300 F Jauf Core # 710 HCl and Sensitivity 2500 Effluent From Core #640 6 wt% wt% Acetic Acid 15 wt% HCl 12 12 wt% wt%HCl HCl- 6 6wt% 10 + 75 wt%Cl NH Cl 15 wt% HCl 12 wt% 3HCl - HF 6 wt% NH Ammonium wt% Ammonium 6 wt% NH Cl 3 wt% HF 20000 3 wt%Mud HF Acid Chloride Chloride 150 2000 Fe 190 Al 15000 1500 Si 200 Ca Al Fe 10000 1000 200 K Si Mg 250 500 o
14000
4
4
4
Concentration ( mg/L)
Delta Pressure (psi)
12000
Concentration (mg/L)
Mineral • Zeolites • Chlorites • Illite • Mixed Layer • Smectite • Kaolinite
10000
8000
6000
4000
5000
Mg 2000
0
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
34
K
0
0 1
0.00 1
3 3
25.00 50.00 7 Cumulative 9 11 Volume 13 15 Pore
5 5
7
9
Sample11#
13
75.00 19
17 15
17
19
Sample Number
17
Organic Mud Acid • Formic acid (9% L036 replaces 12% HCl) • Less corrosive than comparable Mud Acid formulations • Reaction rate ~ 1/4 that of Mud Acid • Reduces sludge tendency
+ L36 (Formic)
HF or
Y1 Mud Acid
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
35
Retarded HF Systems • Problem
– Mud Acid (HCl-HF) spends very rapidly near the wellbore and is not effective in removing clays and other fines deep in the formation. – Some wells show good stimulation initially, but experience a rapid production decline. • Solution
– Retarded Mud Acid system for deep Hydrofluoric penetration. – A system that stabilizes formation fines. – Low HF concentrations Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
36
18
Retarded HF formulation using Fluoboric Acid (HBF4) Clay Acid • Ammonium bifluoride + boric acid + HCl • HBF4 + H20 HBF3(OH) + HF • HF reacts with silt and clay • HBF4 continues to generate HF slowly
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
37
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
38
19
Kaolinite Observed With SEM
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
39
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
40
20
Improved Penetration with Fluoboric Acid Permeability, % Change
800 Fluoboric/Clay Acid 12% HCl - 3%HF
600 400 200 1st 6 in. Unconsolidation
0 0
10
20
30
40
Distance From Inlet (in.) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
41
Water Sensitivity Test Frio Sand Untreated
Treated
% of Original Permeability 140
% of Original Permeability 140
120
120
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0 0
5
10
15
20
25
Pore Volumes
30
0
5
Distilled Water 6% Sodium Chloride Clay Acid
10
15
20
25
30
Pore Volumes
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
42
21
Fluoboric Acid Shut-In Time Minimum ShutShut -in Time (hr) BHST (°F) ( F)
Regular Clay Acid
Clay Acid LT
100 110 120
96 76 52
48 38 26
130 140 150
35 24 16
18 * *
160 170 180
11 8 5
* * *
190 225 250 300
3 2 1 0.5
* * * *
*Clay Acid LT can be used to 130O F, Engineering Solutions but isMatrix not Stimulation recommended above 130O F.
43
Clay Acid Applications • Preflush to Mud Acid: Very acid sensitive formation • Main Acid: Carbonate-cemented sandstones • Overflush to Mud Acid: Enhanced fines control • Shut-in and bring production back slowly NH4Cl w/ U66 30-60 gal/ft
Clay Acid 100-125 gal/ft
HCl or DAD 50-75 gal/ft
Mud Acid 100-150 gal/ft
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
44
22
Publications on Clay Acid Mobil - SPE 8399 Arco - SPE 11722 Exxon - SPE 9387 Tenneco - SPE 14820 AGIP - SPE 20623 Statoil - SPE 24991 Statoil - SPE 31077 Ashland - IPA
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
45
Evaluation of Fluoboric Acid Treatment in the Grand Isle Offshore area using Multiple Flow Rate Test • Seven case histories were presented • A plot of (Pws2 - Pwf2) / Qg vs. Qg (the turbulence plot) was used as an evaluation tool. 2 2 ∆( P 2 ) Pws − Pwf = = C L + D 'Q g Qg Qg
REF: McBride, Rathbone, and Thomas, SPE 8399
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
46
23
∆(p2 ) / Q (PSI2 / SCFD) 2
6 months after RMA After RMA 1
After Clay Acid 3 years after Clay Acid 0 0
5
10
15
Q (MMCFD) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
47
12.0
Q (MMscf/D)
10.0
After Mud Acid Trt.
After Fluoboric Acid Treatment
8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0 -6
0
10
20
30
40
50
Time (Months) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
48
24
Silicon to Aluminum ratios in HF and Fluoboric Acid effluents Zone
Sample
HCL/HF
Fluoboric
C(3.4)
B C C’
0.6 -
2.9 2.5
A(1.7)
E F F’
0.5 -
1.6 1.7
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
49
SPE 20623 ADVANCES IN MATRIX STIMULATION TECHNOLOGY G. Paccaloni and M. Tambini AGIP Spa
• Incorrect Stimulation Fluid • • • •
Initial: Reperforate: Mud Acid: Fluoboric Acid:
2200 BOPD 2000 BOPD 2000 BOPD 1900 BOPD
400 BOPD @ 6 months Same decline Same decline @ 60 months
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
50
25
Ashland Oil Well No. 3
2000
Production (BLPD)
1500
1000 After Fluoboric Acid Treatment
500 Decline after Mud Acid & Clay Control Treatment 0 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Time (Years) Figure 8 - Production of Oil Well No. 3 showing decline after Mud Acid treatment indicative of fines migration and sustained production after fluoboric acid treatment. Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
51
CONCLUSIONS • HBF4 generates HF at a slow rate thus providing deeper live-acid penetration than is possible with ordinary HCl/HF acid. • Treatment with HBF4 prevents silt and clay migration/swelling through fusion of platelets and reduction of CEC. This should prevent fines dispersion resulting from both ionic shock and mechanical dislodgment. • HBF4 normally is used n combination with HCl/HF acid. The faster-reacting HCl/HF acid removes damage immediately around the wellbore, while the HBF4 penetrates deeper to remove formation damage and to stabilize clays and other fines. • A shut-in period is required following injection of HBF4 to allow spending of the acid and stabilization of the clay. • HBF4 is less damaging to formation integrity than HCl/HF acid. • Fluoboric acid minimizes silica formation. • Case history studies of the use of fluoboric acid in sandstone matrix acidizing indicate that the system is very effective in removing formation damage and stabilizing formation fines. Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
52
26
Organic Fluoboric Acid (OCA) for HCl Sensitive Sandstone Formations
Applications • HCl Sensitive Formations –Unconsolidated sandstones –Chlorite –Zeolite
• High Silt/Clay Content –> 30% Silt/Clay
• HT formations –T > 300 F Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
54
27
Fluid Selection Guidelines OCA-HT Temp >300F
OCA
yes
Temp < 300F
yes
Zeolite 5% any temp
yes
Chlorite 5% any temp
yes yes
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
55
Experimental Methods • Sequential Acid Spending
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
56
28
Testing Results • Sequential acid spending on 90% 100 mesh sand and 10% zeolite, 200oF
Si Concentration (Molar)
0.4
0.35
Organic Clay Acid 9/1 mud acid Clay Acid 3/1 mud acid
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2
1
3
4
Sequential Reaction ----->
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
57
Core Flow Testing 9/1 Mud Acid
140
Potential Fine Migration after Acidizing
Permeability (md)
120
100
80
60 6% N aC l F re s h W a te r 3% N H 4C l 15% H C L 9 /1 M u d A c id
40
20
0 0
50
100
150
200
250
T im e (m in ) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
58
29
Core Flow Testing OCA 1000
6% N aC l F r e s h W a te r 3% N H 4Cl 15% H C l OCA
900
Permeability (md)
800 700 600 500
Fines stabilized
400 300 200 100 0 0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
T im e (m i n ) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
59
Placement 1. NH4Cl preflush 2. 10% Acetic Acid 3. OCA 4. NH4Cl overflush 5. Diverter 6. Repeat 2-5 as required No Shut-in Required
(25-50 gpf) (75-100 gpf) (100-200 gpf) (3-4 feet radially)
OCA 100-200 gal/ft
NH4Cl 25-50 gal/ft
NH4Cl w/ U66 25-50 gal/ft
10% Acetic Acid 75-100 gal/ft
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
60
30
Differentiation Recomended Procedure Low Temperature Non Sensitive Clays Low Clay Content Low Temperature Non Sensitive Clays High Clay Content
A
5% NH4Cl Preflush
B
HCl Preflush
C
Organic Acid Preflush
D
Mud Acid
E
Clay Acid
F
Organic Clay Acid
G
Shut In
H
5% NH4Cl Postflush
I
Immediate Flow Back
A B D H I
Mud Acid A B D E G
Clay Acid
Low Temperature Sensitive Clays Any Clay Content
A C F H I
High Temperature Sensitive Clays Any Clay Content
A C F H I
OCA OCA HT
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
61
Case History #1 - GOM • • • • • • •
Deep water turbidite sand 11,000’ TVD, BHST 175 F Frac-Pac completion Permeability - 400 to 1600 md 5% Zeolite Compaction - 20 - 30% perm reduction Increasing skins - higher drawdowns
BOPD MCFD
Well #1 Before After 775 1034 498 547
11,592’
11,928’
Well#2 Before After 218 1045 216 837 12,060’
Production levels sustained for more than 1 year
12,141’
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
62
31
Case History 1: GOM 5000
10
Treating Pressure - psi Injection Rate - BPM
8
4000
Acid at Perfs
3000
6
Pump OCA
Start Displacement Start PostFlush
2000
4
End of Treatment
Prime Pumps
1000
0 220
Injection Rate - (BPM)
Pressure - psi
Increase Rate
2
245
270
295
320
345
370
0
Job Time (Minutes)
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
63
Case History #4- Venezuela • • • • •
Temp: 140 – 235 °F Reservoir Pressure: 950 – 1400 psi Reservoir Permeability: 100 - 300 mD Depth: 2900 -4200 ft Gravel Packed with sand 20/40
Average Oil Prod, BOPD
280
Average Bef ore
Average Expected
Average Act ual
M ud A cid Treatments
240
Formation lithology: Quartz: 48%-56% Mica: 3%-11% K-Feldspar: 1%-3% Kaolinite: 28%-36% Smectite: 1.4%-2.3% Illite: 1%-2.5% Chlorite: 1.1%-3%% Zeolites: 1.2%
200 160 120 80 40 0 0
30
60
90
120
Tim e after Treatm ent (days) Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
64
32
Case History #5- Pakistan • • • • • •
Temp: 340 °F Reservoir Pressure: 4300 psi Reservoir Permeability: 160 mD Perfs: 3318.5m to 3328.0m Gravel Packed with sand 20/40 Acetic acid and OCA w/ VES diverter
Post-Stimulation
Formation lithology: Quartz: Mica: Feldspar: Smectite: Glauconite: Chlorite: Siderite: FeFe-Dolomite
49%49%-60% 1%1%-3% 1%1%-6% 1.4%1.4%-2.3% 1% 7%7%-10% 7%7%-20% 0%0%-7%
Lowered FWHP ~400 psi Maintain production at 50 MMscfd
Pre-Stimulation Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
65
Organic Fluoboric Acid: Conclusions • OCA provides safe stimulation of sensitive formations – Zeolites, Chlorites and high temp formations – High clay content
• • • •
OCA provides deeper penetration Undesirable precipitates are minimized Fines Migration is controlled No shut in required
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
66
33
Sandstone Acidizing Conclusions • Damage identification determines the types of acid and other solvents used. • Fluid selection for a mud acid treatment is based on permeability and mineralogy. • A knowledge of the chemical reactions involved between acids with formation minerals and connate fluids is required. • Appropriate volumes of preflushes and overflushes help prevent incompatibilities. • The primary reaction of mud acid with silt and clay occurs very fast. • Secondary and tertiary reactions do not contribute to damage removal. • Hydrated silica (silica gel) is normally not a damaging precipitate. • Retarded acid with silt and clay control properties are required in sandstone reservoirs with production declines. • Acid sensitive sandstone reservoirs cannot be treated with a conventional mud acid treatment, i.e. they require a organic fluoboric acid system. • Although guidelines exist for volume selection a numerical simulator is recommended to quantify acid volumes. Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
67
Matrix Stimulation: Sandstone Sandstone Stages 1. Pre-acid Preflush Fluids @ End 2. Acid Preflush of Treatment?? 3. Main Treating Fluid 4 3 2 1 4. Overflush
StimCADE Demo
5. Diverter Stage
Matrix Stimulation Engineering Solutions
68
34
View more...
Comments