Mineralogy and Rock Response Analysis Approach to Mitigate Wellbore Stability issue in “B” Cluster of East Java Field
Abstract
The instability of shales in drilled formations leads to serious operational problems with major economic consequences for petroleum exploration and production. It is generally has agreed that the nature of the clay minerals in shale formations is a primary causative factor leading to their instability, although the exact mechanism involved is more debatable. Currently, the principal cause of shale instability is considered to be volume expansion following the osmotic swelling of sodium smectite. However, illitic and Kaolinite shales may also be unstable, so that interlayer expansion cannot therefore be consider as a universal causative mechanism of shale instability. This review considers alternative scenarios of shale instability where the major clay minerals Kaolinite suspected to be a key success to mitigate the wellbore stability. It is found from the literature that the inhibited by the use of more concentrated Potassium-based fluids which is effectively shrink the thickness of the clay mineral surfaces in the pore walls but may differently responded by Kaolinite dominant clay. The use of soluble polymers would also encapsulate these clay mineral surfaces and so inhibit their hydration. In this scenario, the locus of action with respect to shale instability and its inhibition is moved from the interlamellar space of the smectitic clays to the charged external surfaces of the various clay minerals bounding the walls of the shale pores.
Keywords: shale instability, smectitic shale, illitic shale, Kaolinitic shale.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
References
Mondshine, et al. (1966) Shale Dehydration Studies Point Way to Successful Gumbo Shale Drilling. Oil & Gas Journal, 194-205.
Grim, R.E., 1968. “Clay Mineralogy”, 2nd edition. McGraw-Hill New York.
Moore, P.L., et al., 1972. “Drilling Practice Manual”, The Petroleum Publishing Company, Oklahoma.
O'Brien, D. E., & Chenevert, M. E. (1973). Stabilizing Sensitive Shales With Inhibited, Potassium-Based Drilling Fluids. Journal of Petroleum Technology.
Bailey, S.W., 1980. “Summary of Recomendation of AIPEA Commitee on Nomenclature Clay Minerals”, American Mineralogist. 65:1-7
Pringgoprawiro, H., 1983. Biostratigrafi dan paleogeografi Cekungan Jawa Timur Utara: Suatu pendekatan baru, Disertasi Doktor, ITB Bandung, 239 hal., tidak dipublikasikan.
----------,1984. “API Recommended Practice Standard Procedure For Field Testing Drilling Fluids”, American Petroleum Institute, Washington D.C., Issued by API Production Department, Dallas, Texas, API RP 13B, Tenth Edition, June 1, 1984.
----------, 1985. “API Specification for Oil-Well Drilling Fluid Materials”, American Petroleum Institute, Washington D.C., Issued by API Production Department, Dallas, Texas, API RP 13A, Eleventh Edition, July 1, 1985.
Rabia, H., 1985. “Oilwell Drilling Engineering, Principles and Practice”, Graham & Trotman Limited, London, UK.
Lummus, J.L., and Azar, J.J., 1986. “Drilling Fluids Optimization, A Practical Field Approach”, PennWell Books, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
----------, 1998. “Baroid Fluids Handbook”, Houston, TX 77251.
Klein, C., 2002. “Mineral Science”, 22nd ed. John Wiley & Sons. New York.
Mondshine, T.C. (2004). Shale Analysis for Mud Engineers. AADE Drilling Fluids Conference, at the Radisson Astrodome in Houston, Texas.
M.A. Ramirez et al, 2005, Aluminium –Based HPWBM Successfully Replaces Oil-Based Mud to Drill Exploratory Wells in an Environmentally Sensitive Area: SPE 94437)
----------, 2013. “Mud Log X24”, JOB Pertamina – PetroChina East Java.
Jarvie, D. M., Ronald J. Hill, Tim E. Ruble, and Richard M. Palastro Hill, R. M. Pollastro, 2007, Unconventional shale – gas system: The Mississipian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as model for thermogenic shale-gas assesment.: AAPG Bulletin, V.91, No.4 April 2007)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31315/jpgt.v4i1.7336
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.