Coiled-Tubing Cement Squeeze in Colombia's Casanare Field F. Tarazona; F. Tarazona BP Colombia Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar R. Stephens; R. Stephens BP Colombia Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar W. Crow W. Crow BP Exploration Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable, Houston, Texas, March 2001. Paper Number: SPE-68433-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/68433-MS Published: March 07 2001 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Tarazona, F., Stephens, R., and W. Crow. "Coiled-Tubing Cement Squeeze in Colombia's Casanare Field." Paper presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable, Houston, Texas, March 2001. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/68433-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE/ICoTA Well Intervention Conference and Exhibition Search Advanced Search AbstractThis paper discusses recent coiled tubing (CT) cement squeeze planning and operations conducted in the Casanare Field in Colombia. Zonal isolation for gas shutoff was identified as a critical factor to help reduce the GOR for wells that would otherwise shut in due to gas handling limits of the production facility. The planning phase included a cement laboratory audit that was used to identify the reason for discrepancies of the cement design between the laboratory conditions and the full scale mixing trial. Voltage variation during laboratory tests was identified as a major factor which affected the mixing energy. Another source of discrepancy between the laboratory results and the sample batches with field equipment was the amount of energy imparted to the system by use of centrifugal pumps. Cement design properties were critical to achieve sufficient thickening time and filter cake quality in the presence of relatively high reservoir temperature and reduced formation pressure. Discretionary disposal of several batches of cement was required until those design parameters were met. Communication and crew training were fundamental to identifying and resolving problems, especially in an area that had not yet conducted this type of operation.DiscussionNormal laboratory tests were conducted that included all standard measurements of thickening time, density, fluid loss and rheology as well as a comparison of sample batches mixed with field equipment. The tests were used to define the slurry to be used in the field. However when the initial 2 batches of cement were mixed on location, they were rejected because they were out of range for fluid loss and filter cake thickness and hardness. A target of 5 API units was used to obtain consistency needed to duplicate field conditions (Figure 1). Although the filter cake height curve begins to stabilize at 2.5 API units, the fluid loss volume does not begin to stabilize until approximately 4 API units have been reached. A laboratory audit was conducted to identify the nature of the problem. It was determined that laboratory mixing procedures only yielded an actual value of 0.5 API units due to problems with the local voltage supply during the slurry preparation (Table 1). The laboratory tests were performed again with the same amount of additives as the original blend (but with 5 API units mixing energy) and found the range of error created by the voltage discrepancy yielded a fluid loss of 92 ml/30 min (155% greater than the target value) and a filter cake of 2.28 inches (240% more than the target value). This is due to a minimum amount of shear energy needed by the slurry to properly activate the chemical reaction of the cement and additives.The other problem identified was a discrepancy in the mixing energy as the result of using the centrifugal pump to circulate the slurry after it had reached the target density with all the cement additives. Use of the centrifugal pump on the mixed slurry for as little as 12 minutes was found to decrease the thickening time of the slurry from 7.3 hours to 4.0 hours. This variation of thickening time was determined to be independent of use of additives since it was repeated with the same results both with and without cement additives.OperationsBuenos Aires Y-7The first well planned for a cement squeeze, Buenos Aires Y-7 (Figure 2), was scheduled for conversion to gas injection with a workover and would limit the risk associated with the coiled tubing operations. During initial well preparation, two cement slurries were discarded on site because they did not meet field quality control guidelines for rheology or fluid loss. Operations were aborted to review the quality control problems including an audit of the cement laboratory that indicated the local electrical supply variation as a cause of the discrepancy. A new cement design was tested and verified with a trial blend using field equipment. Keywords: drilling fluids and materials, slurry characteristic, drilling fluid chemistry, colombia, thickness, drilling fluid formulation, cement formulation, upstream oil & gas, casing and cementing, differential pressure Subjects: Drilling Fluids and Materials, Casing and Cementing, Drilling fluid selection and formulation (chemistry, properties), Cement formulation (chemistry, properties), Completion Installation and Operations, Well Integrity, Coiled tubing operations, Zonal isolation This content is only available via PDF. 2001. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.