SPE 73706

Lessons Learned from Acid Pickle Treatments of Deep/Sour Gas Wells

H.A. Nasr-El-Din, SPE, S.H. Al-Mutairi, S.M. A l-Driweesh, SPE, Saudi Aramco

Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc. samples were collected every two minutes and were also
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE International Symposium and Exhibition analyzed to determine their composition.
on Formation Damage Control held in Lafayette, Louisiana, 20–21 February 2002.
Analysis of spent acids indicated that the major tubular
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
contaminants are mill scale and pipe dope. Spent acid samples
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to collected from deep sour gas wells contained up to nearly
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at 105,500 mg/L of total iron. The efficiency of removing pipe
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
dope was followed by tracing the concentration of zinc, the
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is main acid-soluble constituent in the pipe dope, in the spent
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acid. The concentrations of acid and iron were used to
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. determine acid reaction with the corrosion products present in
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
the tubing. The concentration of the chloride ions was used to
determine the dispersion and mixing behavior of the acid slug
Abstract in the wellbore.
Pickle treatments are commonly conducted to remove various This paper presents the results obtained from analyzing
contaminants from the wellbore prior to performing chemical more than 2,000 samples obtained from twenty treatments.
treatments in various wells. Introduction of these contaminants The results of this work have been used to enhance the
into the formation during the treatment can cause loss of well efficiency of the pickle treatments and to significantly reduce
performance, especially in tight formations. Pickle treatments the treatment cost.
should be designed to remove various contaminants from well
tubulars in an efficient and cost effective way. Introduction
A pickle treatment was designed to clean well tubulars in Formation damage occurs during acidizing or chemical
several wells prior to performing acid fracturing in the treatments due to the presence of contaminants in the tubing.
carbonate formation. The pickle treatment consisted of Several researchers investigated the type and concentration of
several fluids such that each fluid removed one type of these contaminants.1-4 The main contaminants present in a typical
contaminants. This paper examines the effects of fluid well tubing are mill scale, iron sulfides, pipe dope, sand, and
composition, volume, and placement (bullheading versus other fine particles that were picked up during storage and
coiled tubing) on the efficiency of pickling treatments. More transportation of the tubing string. Oil or condensate may also be
than twenty pickle treatments performed on deep, sour, hot gas present in old producers.
wells were examined. One of the contaminants in the wellbore is pipe dope. Pipe
To assess pickle treatments in the field, spent acid was dope is used to seal tubing joints, minimize thread erosion and
analyzed and the concentrations of key ions were measured. enhance the galling resistance of the threads.5,6 Many authors
Sufficient measurements were made to obtain concentration recommended not to use excessive amounts of pipe dope, which
profiles of key chemical species in the spent pickle acid. may end in the target zone and cause severe formation damage.1-
These profiles were numerically integrated and the data were 4
used to assess the outcome of each pickle treatment. In Another main source of wellbore contaminants is iron scale.
addition, particulate solids present in the spent acid were New low-carbon steel pipes (J-55, C-95 and L-80) are always
separated and analyzed using XRD and XRF techniques. covered with mill scale (magnetite, Fe3 O4 ).7-10 Iron oxides
Pickle treatments were conducted on more than twenty dissolve in HCl and release ferric and ferrous ions into the acid.
gas wells. Some of these wells were perforated, while others Ferric ions will precipitate once the acid enters the formation and
were not perforated. Un-perforated wells were pickled using the pH rises above a value of 1-2.10-13 Precipitation of iron
1.75” high-pressure coiled tubing. On the other hand, compounds will cause severe formation damage and, as a result,
perforated wells were pickled using bullheading. The pickle the efficiency of the acid treatment will diminish. In old wells
treatments consisted of slugs of surfactants, organic solvents, and depending on the type of the treated well, iron scale can be
hydrochloric acid and gelled fluids. Samples of all pumped covered by oil, condensate, or biomass. In addition, if the well is
fluids were collected and analyzed. In addition, well flow back sour, then iron sulfide species will be present too.13,17 Some of
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 2
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
the iron sulfide species react with HCl and produce hydrogen Well Completion
sulfide, which can react with iron and precipitate iron sulfide at More than twenty vertical, cased (unperforated and perforated)
pH values greater than 1.9.12,18 Hydrogen sulfide can also react wells were examined. These wells were completed with 4.5,
with ferric ions and precipitate elemental sulfur. 5.5” tubing or combinations of both. C-95 grade tubing with
Contaminants present in the tubing will cause severe new Vam connecters are used in these wells. L-80 grade
formation damage if ht ey invade the target zone. Therefore, connections or crossovers are also used in some cases. Table 1
every effort should be made to remove these contaminants gives the elemental composition of C-95, L-80 and the high-
before applying any chemical treatments. Tube pickling is pressure coiled tubing that was used to pickle the tubing of
recommended to remove wellbore contaminants before acid unperforated wells. All wells are completed with 7” or 7x4.5”
treatments.8,19-21 cemented liners. The perforation density is 6 shot per foot at
Recently, Saudi Aramco embarked on an extensive 60° phasing. The perforation diameter is 0.32” and the length
campaign to develop its gas fields. Acid fracturing has been of the perforation tunnel is 22”. A typical cross section of gas
used to enhance the performance of gas wells in a tight carbonate wells in this field is shown in Fig. 1. Solares gave more
gas reservoir. To ensure good results from acid fracture details on well completion and the mechanical strength
treatments, a thorough tube cleaning treatment was performed requirements for well tubulars for the frac treatments.23 Rahim
before conducting the main acid treatment. The objectives of and Al-Qahtani discussed the criterion used for selecting the
this work were to: (1) investigate the nature of various perforation intervals.22
contaminants that may be present in the tubing, (2) design pickle
treatments for perforated and unperforated deep, sour gas Experimental Studies
wells, (3) assess the treatment in the field, and (4) optimize the A thorough experimental program was conducted to optimize
treatment based on lab and field results. tube pickling procedures. The study is divided into several
parts. In the first part, the composition of pipe dope and its
Reservoir Description characteristics were determined. Two types of pipe dope were
One of the main non-associated gas reservoirs in Saudi Arabia noted: one is used for the joints of well casing and production
is the Khuff formation (carbonate). The Khuff formation is tubing, whereas the second one is used for the joints of drilling
located in the eastern province of Saudi Arabia. This pipe. Photos 1 and 2 show the two types of pipe dope.
formation belongs to the late Permian age and is encountered Samples of pipe dope were obtained from a local supplier and
at an average depth of 11,500 ft.22 The Khuff formation is they are typical to those used in the field.
subdivided into four main zones, denoted A, B, C, and D. To determine the composition of pipe dope, the samples
Zones B and C are the two main intervals producing non- were first soaked in xylene (typically 100 g of pipe dope in
associated gas. Lithological studies show that the reservoir is 1000 cm3 of xylene) to dissolve the organic portion (heavy
composed of dolomite intermingled with limestone and hydrocarbons). The hydrocarbon content of the pipe dope was
intermittent anhydrite stringer within the tighter section of the then determined using gravimetric techniques. Acid solubility
reservoir. The two reservoirs have varying pay thickness, on tests were conducted on xylene-insoluble material.
average, from 120 ft in the Khuff B to 200 ft in the Khuff C. Hydrochloric acid at 20 wt% was used in these tests. The acid
The average initial reservoir pressure is 7,000 psi and the to solids weight ratio was 10:1 and the soaking time was two
average bottom hole static temperature is 275°F.23 The hours. Chemical analysis of the supernatant was conducted to
reservoir has a permeability of 0.1 to 5 mD and tends to have determine the concentrations of key ions. The composition of
significant porosity.24 Hydrogen sulfide content depends on the acid in-soluble portion was determined using XRD and
well location and depth. Wells in the northern part of the XRF techniques. The density and particle size distribution of
reservoir produce gas with up to 10 mol% H2 S, whereas those the xylene-insoluble portion were also determined.
in the south produce gas at nearly zero H2 S content.25 The Pickle treatments were conducted on perforated and
produced gas contains up to 4 mol% carbon dioxide. There are unperforated wells. For unperforated wells, the acid was
approximately 40 bbls of condensate and 1.5 bbls of water pumped down the tubing then lifted from the wellbore using
produced per 1 MMSCF of gas.16 coiled tubing (CT). For perforated wells, the acid was
Stimulation efforts in the Khuff reservoirs are needed to bullheaded and the reservoir pressure was used to lift the spent
remove drilling mud filter cake and enhance reservoir acid from the wellbore. Every effort was made to avoid
permeability. Both matrix and fracturing acidizing treatments pumping the spent acid into the formation. Therefore, the acid
were conducted in this field. Regular, emulsified and gelled was placed up to 50 ft above the upper set of perforations.
acids at 28 wt% HCl have been used to stimulate gas wells in Samples of well flow back were collected every two minutes.
this formation.22 A thorough tubing pickling was conducted This short interval was needed to follow acid reactions with
before each treatment. Some of the pickle treatments were wellbore contaminants.
done before well perforation, while others were pickled The well flow back samples typically contained diesel
following perforating these wells. (unperforated wells) or condensate (perforated wells), aqueous
phase, mainly the spent acid, and solids. Each phase was
separated and analyzed. Several analyses were conducted on
the aqueous phase including measuring sulfide, pH, Cl, Na,
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 3
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ca, Mg, Zn, Pb, Mn, and total iron. Sulfide content and pH The rate of this reaction was given by Lawson et al.,30
were determined on site. In addition, ferrous ion concentration Equation 5:
was measured in the field using the method of Taylor et al.26
The concentrations of various cations were determined by Rate = k f [H+ ]– kb [Fe2+]0.5 (PH2S)0.5 (5).
Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy (ICP).
The sulfate ion concentration in the aqueous phase was Where kf and kb are the rates of the forward and backward
measured turbidimetrically following precipitation with a 0.1N reactions, respectively. Several important points can be
barium chloride solution. The chloride ion was measured by inferred from Equation 5. The rate of dissolution of iron
titration using a 0.1N silver nitrate solution. The concentration sulfide can be increased by using concentrated acids. This
of hydrochloric acid was measured by acid/base titration using finding was confirmed by Lawson et al.30 using sulfuric acid
a 0.1N NaOH solution. and by Nasr-El-Din et al.31 using hydrochloric acid.
The solids were filtered out, dried then analyzed using Accumulation of hydrogen sulfide in the system will reduce
SEM, XRD, and XRF techniques. the rate of acid reaction with the scale. Therefore, it is very
important to scavenge hydrogen sulfide so as to dissolve iron
Governing Equations sulfide scale. It may be also useful to use an iron chelating
Reaction of Acid with Magnetite (Fe3O4) agent to maintain the forward (dissolution) reaction.
Magnetite is the most likely iron scale present on the tubulars Based on the experimental work performed by Nasr-El-
of new and old wells where there is no hydrogen sulfide Din et al.,31 HCl at 20 wt% was recommended for pickling
present in the system. Dissolution of magnetite in HCl acid treatments that were conducted in the field. Higher acid
can be described by the following equation:27 concentrations were not recommended because the acid
becomes very corrosive at high concentrations, especially at
Fe3 O4 + Fe + 8H+ = 4 Fe2+ + 4 H2 O (1) high temperatures. Concentrated acids will require large
amounts of corrosion inhibitors, which may adversely affect
Tanaka and Tamamushi examined the reaction rate of HCl the ability of the acid to dissolve iron scale.31
with magnetite.28 The fraction conversion of scale (a c) as a Based on Equation 5, and the nature of iron sulfide scale,
function of time, t, can be expressed as: the acid should contain several additives. First, the acid
should contain a corrosion inhibitor to protect the base metal.
− ln (1 - α c ) = β sinh kt (2) Secondly, a water-wetting surfactant should be added to the
acid to remove condensate and other hydrocarbons from the
surface of iron sulfide scale. The surfactant will enhance acid-
ß is a constant that equals 0.09 for HCl-magnetite system. The scale contact. Thirdly, the acid should contain a suitable
approximate reaction rate of the acid, k, is:27
hydrogen sulfide scavenger. Nasr-El-Din and coworkers have
examined the performances of hydrogen sulfide scavengers
k = k i (a H ) 0.5 (a Fe ) 0.5 (a Fe ) -0.5 (a An ) u
+ 2+ 3+ y- (3) that are used during well acidizing.31-33

where aj is the activity coefficient for a species j and u is a Mass Transfer during Acid Pickling
constant that depends on the type of acid used. For HCl, the To perform an efficient acid pickling treatment, the injected
value of u is approximately 0.7. acid and other cleaning chemicals should come in contact with
mill scale or the material they suppose to dissolve and remove.
Reaction of Acid with Iron Sulfide (FeS) Mill scale and other scales, in general, will be always covered
The type of iron scale present on well tubulars depends on the with hydrocarbons and other contaminants. These
composition of the produced gas, especially its hydrogen contaminants are insoluble in acid and, as a result, they will
sulfide content. Iron sulfide scale is present in perforated act as a diffusion barrier that will prevent the acid from
wells. This is especially true for the northern area wells where contacting iron scale. Therefore, there is a need to remove
hydrogen sulfide content can reach 10 mol%. Iron sulfide these materials so that the surface of the scale becomes water-
scale is present in several chemical species, which differ in wet and there will be good chance that the acid will dissolve
acid solubility. Iron sulfide species with iron to sulfur molar the iron scale. To overcome this problem in the field, various
ratios close to unity are soluble in minerals acids. However, surfactants were added to the preflush and to the acid. In
iron sulfide species with sulfur-to-iron molar ratio of two have addition, slugs of organic solvents were employed to remove
very low solubility in HCl acid.17,29 pipe dope. Once these contaminants are removed, the acid
Hydrochloric acid reacts with iron sulfide (FeS) as will diffuse into the surface and reacts with the iron scale.
follows: This mass transfer process includes acid diffusion to the
surface, then acid reaction with the scale, a heterogeneous
FeS + 2H+ → H2 S(g) + Fe2+ (4). reaction, and finally diffusion of the reaction products from
the tubing surface into the main stream.
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 4
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Mass transfer of a reactive species to the surface of a tube unperforated wells where a CT was used, e.g., well WHD-
was examined by Levich35 and Loewen et al.8 According to X10, Re for fluid flow in the tubing was nearly 12,813 and
Levich, the local mass transfer rate of the acid depends on the 11,400 for fluid flow in the liner (liner has a larger diameter
type of flow in the tubing: laminar or turbulent flow. than the tubing). For perforated wells, e.g., WHW-X14, Re
For laminar flow, the local mass transfer rate, JL , is: numbers are 33,085 and 18,741 for fluid flow in the tubing
1 and liner, respectively. Based on these values, the flow of the
 U b  3
acid slug was turbulent in all cases studied. Therefore,
J L = 0 . 67 C b D m   (6)
Equation 7 can be used to predict the local mass transfer rate
 D m Rx  during pickling treatments.
All symbols are defined in the nomenclature. For turbulent Results and Discussion
flow, the local mass transfer rate, JT , is: Characteristics of Pipe Dope
Samples of the pipe dope (P hotos 1 and 2) used during
k f U b Cb placing well casing and the drill pipe were examined. Table 2
JT = (7) summarizes the results obtained with the two types of pipe
2 α Pr 34 dope. The pipe dope that was used for the casing contained
nearly 26 wt% of organic material, whereas that was used in
where a is a constant (equals unity) and Pr is Prandtl number, drill pipe had 39 wt% organic materials.
given by: In order to characterize the inorganic portion of the pipe
? dope, the hydrocarbon portion was first dissolved using
Pr = (8) xylene. Several tests were conducted on the xylene insoluble
Dm material. XRD analysis indicated that the casing and tubing
K f is the friction coefficient and its value depends on Reynolds pipe dope (brown) contained mainly lead. Zinc, copper, talc,
number as follows: Mg 3 Si4 O10 (OH)2 , muscovite KAl3 Si3 O10 (OH)2 and graphite
were present at lower concentrations. On the other hand, zinc
0.32 was the main constituent of the drill pipe dope (gray), whereas
Kf = 1
Re = 106 (9) talc, graphite, and zincite, ZnO, were present in minor
4
Re amounts.
The concentrations of various cations in the inorganic
0.221 portion of pipe dope were determined using XRF techniques,
K f = 0.0032 + Re > 106 (10) and the results are given in Table 3. The drill pipe dope
0.237Re contained mainly zinc and almost no lead. This is in
agreement with the XRD analysis. The casing pipe dope
Reynolds number can be calculated for the tubing as follows: contained lead and zinc. Both types of pipe dope contained
other elements, but in smaller concentrations including Si, Ca,
? UbD Mg, and Al.
Re = (11) Particle size distribution of the xylene insoluble material
µ was determined using sieve analysis. The results indicated
that the mean particle size for the drill pipe type (gray) was
For annular flow, the hydraulic diameter, DH , should be used 0.25 mm, whereas that of the casing type (brown) was nearly
instead of D. The hydraulic diameter can be calculated as per 0.08 mm.
Equation 12: The density of the inorganic portion in the pipe dope that
is used for the casing is slightly higher than that of the pipe
4 × volume of liquid
DH = = ( D2 − D1 ) (12)
dope used in the drill pipe. The casing pipe dope contained
lead (density = 11.34 g/cm3 at 20ºC), and copper (density =
Surface wetted by liquid
8.95 g/cm3 at 20ºC). The pipe dope used in the drill pipe has
zinc (density = 7.14 g/cm3 at 20ºC) as a major component.
where D2 is the outer diameter of the CT and D1 is the inner
The difference in the density of various elements resulted in
diameter of tubing or liner.
the apparent difference noted in the density of the inorganic
Equations 6 and 7 suggest that to increase the local rate of
portion of the two types of pipe dope examined.
mass transfer, the acid should be used at high concentration
Composition of the inorganic portion of the pipe dope and
and should be pumped at the highest possible rate. Pickling
its surface area affect acid solubility. The drill pipe dope has a
treatments were designed to take these two points into
solubility of 75 wt%, whereas that of the casing dope has only
consideration.
25 wt% (Table 2). The former pipe dope contains zinc at high
It is important to note that the acid (20 wt% HCl) used in
concentration. As a result, its acid solubility was high. On the
the pickling treatment had a density of 1.1 g/cm3 and a
other hand, the casing pipe dope contained lead and copper
viscosity 2 mPa.s, both at ambient conditions. Reynolds
and much less zinc. Lead has a low solubility in HCl. It forms
number will vary during a typical pickling treatment. For
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 5
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PbCl2 , which has low solubility in water at ambient ion is not a reactive species during the pickling process;
conditions. Copper does not dissolve in HCl under the test therefore, it can be used as a tracer. The chloride ion exhibits
conditions. Other elements that dissolve in acid include two main peaks. The first peak occurred during the first 50
calcium, magnesium and iron. However, these elements are minutes and represents the suspension fluid (87 pcf calcium
present in both types of pipe dope. Therefore, they cannot be chloride brine) that was placed in the liner. The second peak
used to explain the difference noted in acid solubility of the lasted for a longer period of time and represents the acid slug
two types of pipe dope. (5,000 gals of 20 wt% HCl). It is interesting to note that the
XRD analysis was also conducted on the acid-insoluble rising and falling portions of the peak are narrow. This is
solids. For the casing pipe dope, lead chloride, PbCl2 , was the because of the gelled fluids that were pumped before and after
main component followed by talc, muscovite, copper and lead. the acid slug. The higher viscosity fluids reduced dispersion
Different results were obtained with the drill pipe dope. Talc of the acid slug in the wellbore.
and graphite were the main components followed by Acid concentration and pH of the well flow back samples
muscovite and quartz. It is evident from these results that are shown in Fig. 3. Acid concentration in the live acid was
almost all zinc was dissolved in the acid. measured on site using a titration method and found to be 23.1
Analysis of the supernatant following acid reaction is wt%, Table 7. The aqueous phase present in the initial
shown in Table 4. The concentration of zinc was extremely samples had a pH values greater than 7. This is due to the
high in the supernatant of the drill pipe dope, reaching 71,774 alkaline nature of the suspension fluid that was placed in the
mg/L. Because of the acid reaction with zinc, acid liner. The pH values reached nearly zero once the acid arrived
concentration decreased from 19.4 to 9.2 wt%. Zinc was also at the wellhead. Low pH values lasted for a long period of
present in the supernatant of the casing pipe dope, but at a time, then gradually increased and reached a value of 2-3 by
much lower concentration. Lead was present in the casing pipe the end of the pickling process. Acid concentration increased
dope. Calcium, iron and magnesium were also present in both gradually until it reached 19.6 wt% (i.e., 85% of the injected
types of pipe dope, but at much lower concentrations. value) then gradually decreased due to pumping of the
It is evident from these data that zinc is the main acid displacing water. These results indicated that a portion of the
soluble component present in both types of pipe dope. In acid was spent in the wellbore.
addition, Zn is not present in the low-carbon steels that were One of important points to highlight is the role of the acid
used to manufacture the CT, tubing or casing (Table 1). in the pickling treatment. This is demonstrated in Figs. 4 to 7.
Therefore, Zn can be used as a marker for the pipe dope. Its The reason for using an acid in the pickling process is to
concentration in the flow back samples can be used to remove iron scale and other acid-soluble contaminants from
determine the effectiveness of clean-up procedures in the field. the wellbore. Hydrochloric acid reacts with magnetite and
produces ferrous and ferric ions. Figure 4 shows the total iron
Pickling of Unperforated Wells in the flow back samples. The concentration of ferrous ions
Unperforated wells were pickled using 1.75” high pressure was measured on site in few samples and is also shown in Fig.
coiled tubing. Before the pickling treatment, the wellbore had 4. Iron was noted in all acidic samples and the total iron
a suspension fluid (87 lb/ft 3 (pcf) calcium chloride brine) in concentration reached 26,799 mg/L after nearly 140 minutes.
the liner and an inhibited diesel in the tubing. The CT was Iron profile shows a long tailing, which lasted for more than
placed in the wellbore few feet above the well total depth 60 minutes.
(TD). Then the cleaning fluids were pumped through the CT at Sources of the produced iron include: iron present in the
a rate of nearly 2 bbls/min. The type and sequence of the live acid, mill scale on the inner surface of the liner, tubing
cleaning fluids are given in Table 5. It is very important to and the external surface of the coiled tubing. Iron
follow this sequence because of the nature of each chemical concentration in the live acid was closely monitored and kept
and the material it is supposed to remove. The cleaning under 100 mg/L. For well WHD-X10, the injected acid
sequence started with a surfactant wash, an organic solvent, 20 (5,000 gals of 20 wt% HCl) contained 77 mg/L of total iron.
wt% acid, and finally the displacing water (field mixing This means that a total of 1.46 kg of total iron was present in
water). Each stage was sandwiched with gelled water stages. the injected acid.
The objective of the gelled slugs was to lift solids released Figure 4 also shows concentration of Fe(II) in few flow
during wellbore cleaning. Samples of the flow back were back samples. Fe(II) concentrations were lower than Fe(III).
collected and analyzed as explained before. Maximum Fe(II) measured was 3,175 mg/L. This means that
Several unperforated wells were pickled by this procedure. the Fe(III):Fe(II) ratio at the peak was 7.4:1. The sources of
Well WHD-X10 is one of these wells. Table 6 gives the acid Fe(II) are magnetite and the tubing. The amount of iron
formula used, whereas Table 7 gives a typical chemical produced during well flow back was obtained by integrating
analysis of the field mixing water and pickling acid used in the data shown in Fig. 4 and was found to be 56.6 kg. This
these wells. WHD-X10 has a 5.5”, 20 lb/linear ft (ppf) tubing result means that 2.6 wt% of the total produced iron is due to
(C-95) and 7”, 35 ppf liner (L-80). The surface areas of the the iron originally present in the injected acid. The source of
tubing, liner, and CT are given in Table 8. Figure 2 shows the majority of produced iron is the tubing, liner and may be
the chloride concentration in the flow back samples. Chloride
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 6
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
the CT. In other words, the main source of produced iron is the liner. Calcium exhibits another peak in the acid samples.
the well tubulars. The second peak resulted from the dissolution of calcium
The amount of produced iron is significant, which confirms carbonate particles used in the suspension fluid by the acid.
the importance of cleaning and pickling the tubing before Flow back samples collected from the wellhead contained
performing acid treatments. This iron would have invaded the suspended solids. These solids were separated and analyzed
formation and caused formation damage, if the tubing and using XRD and XRF techniques and the results are presented
liner were not pickled. in Tables 8 and 9. Pre-acid samples contained barite, calcium
Acid will also dissolve some of the heavy metals present in and magnesium carbonates. These materials are used in the
the pipe dope. Figure 5 depicts the concentration of Zn in the suspension fluid that was present in the liner before the pickle
flow back samples. Zinc appeared in the acidic samples only. treatment. The pickling process was effective in removing
The main source of Zn is the pipe dope. The maximum Zn these solids. The acidic fluids contained barite and magnetite.
concentration noted in the flow back was 194 mg/L. The Calcium carbonate and dolomite particles are soluble in HCl
amount of Zn dissolved by the acid is 284 g, Table 8. acid. Therefore, they were not detected in the acidic samples.
Pipe dope also contains lead. Figure 5 also shows that It is interesting to note that solids contain heavy metals, e.g.,
lead peaked in the acidic samples and reached a maximum of lead, copper. The source of these elements is the pipe dope. It
104 mg/L. The amount of lead produced in the flow back is likely that the diesel that was present in the tubing or the
samples was 256 g. The amount of Zn and Pb produced are organic solvent that was used during the pickling treatment
very small. However, their presence in the flow back samples dissolved the greasy material in the pipe dope and, as a result,
indicates that the organic solvent was able to dissolve the the heavy elements settled in the wellbore. Some of these
greasy material of the pipe dope and exposed its heavy particles were suspended and carried with the cleaning fluids
elements to the acid. It is interesting to note that the amount to the surface.
of Zn and Pb found in the flow back samples is 388 g. This is
a small quantity if compared with the amount of iron produced Pickling of Perforated Wells
(56.6 kg). These results clearly indicate that iron scale is the Pickling of perforated wells is different from that performed
main material dissolved by the acid. on unperforated wells in several aspects. First, there is
The results discussed thus far demonstrate the importance communication between the wellbore and the formation
of tube pickling process. However, acids are corrosive and can through the perforations. Spent acid, which is usually loaded
attack the well tubulars. One way to determine down hole with iron, should not be allowed to invade the formation under
corrosion during tube pickling treatments is to follow the any circumstances. Secondly, the spent acid will be lifted by
concentration of manganese. The tubing and liner are made of the reservoir pressure, or simply by allowing the formation gas
low-carbon steels (C-95 and L-80). Both materials contain to flow to the surface. In this case, there will be no need to use
manganese, Table 1. Moreover, the CT contains manganese, CT to lift the spent acid. Thirdly, the flow path of the spent
however at nearly half the concentration in the tubing or liner. acid is different. Unlike unperforated wells, the spent acid
If the acid attacks the tubing, then it will dissolve manganese. will flow back in the same tubing where it was pumped in the
Figure 6 shows that Mn peaked in the acidic samples and first place. This means that the acid will contact the same
reached a maximum of 266 mg/L. The total amount of surface two times. Fourthly, the produced gas may contain
manganese is 143.4 g. It is important to note that Mn lagged hydrogen sulfide and other acidic gases. These gases may
total iron peak, which indicates that the acid dissolved the mill react with various chemical species present in the spent acid
scale first, magnetite, then reacted with the tubing. and precipitate iron sulfide and iron carbonate. The nature of
The presence of Mn confirms that the acid attacked the iron scale present in the wellbore is different. Iron oxides are
tubing, liner and the CT. However, the total amount produced present in the unperforated wells; whereas various iron sulfide
was very small, 143.4 g (Table 8). The weight ratio of Fe:Mn species will be present in perforated wells. Finally, flow of
produced in the flow back samples is much higher than that gases through wellbore fluids will increase mixing and
present in the low carbon steel tubing, Table 1. This indicates dispersion of the acid slug. These differences will affect the
that the acid dissolved the mill scale and did not significantly concentration profiles as will be discussed later in this paper.
attack the tubing. Considering the total amounts of iron and Lifting spent pickle acid from the wellbore of perforated
manganese dissolved by the acid and the exposed area of the wells is a major concern for sour wells. The well flow back
tubing and liner, the amount of dissolved material is 0.0078 will contain significant amount of hydrogen sulfide, which is a
lb/ft 2 . If the amount of iron diss9olved from the tubing and toxic gas. To address this problem, several modifications were
liner, then the corrosion rate is 0.001 lb/ft 2 . Both values are introduced to the sequence and additives used to pickle
much less than the industry accepted corrosion rate of 0.05 perforated wells. First, a suitable hydrogen sulfide scavenger
lb/ft 2 . In other words, the corrosion package (inhibitor and was added to the acid slug. Secondly, the pH of the gelled
intensifier) was able to protect well tubulars during the water was raised to 10. This is to ensure that all hydrogen
pickling treatment. sulfide is captured before the spent acid reached the wellhead.
Figure 7 shows the concentrations of calcium and sodium Several perforated wells were pickled by bullheading the
in the flow back. Both cations peaked during the first 50 acid. The spent acid in this case was lifted by the reservoir
minutes. This is due to the suspension fluid that was placed in pressure. The pickling sequence for perforated wells is given
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 7
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

in Table 5. The results of well WHW-X14 will be discussed observed with the sodium during flow of acidic solution.
in this paper. Table 8 gives the surface areas of the tubing, However, a small peak was noted for the calcium. The most
and liner for this well. Chemical analysis of the pickling acid likely source of calcium is the residual of calcium carbonate
and mixing water were similar to those given in Table 7. Total particles that were used during drilling and work-over
iron concentration in the live acid was 17 mg/L. operations.
Figure 8 shows the chloride ion concentration in the flow
back samples of well WHW-X14. Initial chloride A Comparison of Pickling Treatment of Perforated and
concentrations were very low. This is due to the low salinity Unperforated Tubing
water that was used to perforate this well. The chloride The results discussed thus far show that there are some
concentration increased to almo st 20,000 mg/L marking the differences between the tube pickling treatment conducted for
acid slug. Chloride concentration started to decrease after 60 perforated and unperforated wells. It is of interest to
minutes and showed a very long tail. The low chloride levels compare these two cases. Pickling of unperforated wells was
noted in the last few samples mark the arrival of the field conducted using HPCT. In this case, the acid flows through
mixing water that was pumped ahead of the acid slug. This the CT, then through the CT/tubing annulus. The acid will
water was used to ensure that the acid slug did not invade the contact a given surface of the tubing one time only. The
formation. leading edge of the acid will arrive first to the wellhead. Also,
Acid concentration and pH values in the flow back samples the front edge has to flow from the bottom of the well to the
are depicted in Fig. 9. The two profiles were in general similar top.
to those noted in well WHD-X10. The main difference In perforated wells, the situation is different. The acid is
between the two profiles is the time needed for the acid to bullheaded and placed nearly 30-50 ft above the upper set of
reach the sampling point. perforations. The spent acid is lifted by the reservoir pressure.
Total iron concentration is shown in Fig. 11. Iron In this case, the acid will contact the surface of the tubing two
concentration reached up to 105,488 mg/L and showed high times. Also, the trailing edge of the acid slug will arrive to the
values for a long period of time. The total amount of iron was wellhead first. The time required for the trailing edge to reach
1,027 kg, Table 8. Considering the surface areas given in the wellhead is shorter. These differences will affect the
Table 8 and the fact that the acid contacts the same surface concentration profiles of key species in the flow back samples.
two times, the amount of iron dissolved per unit area is 0.075 Figure 15 shows the total iron and acid profiles in the flow
lb/ft 2 . This amount is almost an order of magnitude greater back samples of well WHD-X10. The leading edge of the
than that noted in well WHD-X10. acid produced first in unperforated wells. Note that the iron is
Ferrous ion concentrations were not measured for this well. detected earlier than the acid. This indicates that a portion of
However, they were measured in well WUT-X20, another the acid was spent due to iron scale dissolution. High iron
perforated well which produces gas with 10 mol% H2 S. concentration can be seen close to the leading edge of the acid.
Figure 10 illustrates the concentrations of total iron and An opposite trend can be seen in Fig. 16 for well WHW-
ferrous ions in the well flow back samples. The maximum X14, a perforated well. In this case, the trailing edge of the
total iron obtained in this well was 75,215 mg/L and the acid came first. Iron peak was close to the leading edge of the
maximum Fe(II) was 24,000 mg/L. The ratio of Fe(III) to acid slug, which can be seen after nearly 60 minutes of flow
Fe(II) at the peak was nearly 2.1. This value is much smaller back. It is interesting to note that the acid profile started with
than that noted in well WHD-X10. During the flow back, there high concentration, which decreased with time. This is again
was a strong reducing environment, which promoted the opposite to the trend noted with well WHD-X10.
formation of the Fe(II). The results shown in Figs. 15 and 16 highlight the need
The acid did dissolve Zn and Pb, as shown in Fig. 12. Both to understand the flow path of the acid in a given system. This
ions peaked simultaneously when the iron peak was noted. understanding is essential in deciding sampling frequency and
The maximum concentration of Zn and Pb were 301 and 45 timing.
mg/L, respectively. Integration of both peaked indicated that The mode of acid pumping also affects mixing pattern
the total amount produced from the two elements were 1.178 between the acid slug and other fluids present in the wellbore.
and 0.273 kg, respectively. This point is demonstrated in Figs. 17 and 18. In these
The concentrations of total iron and manganese are plotted figures, the normalized concentration of the chloride ion is
in Fig. 13. Maximum Mn concentration was 525 mg/L. The plotted as a function of flow back time. The normalized
total amount of Mn produced is 6.584 kg. The total amount of concentration is defined as the chloride concentration at a
iron that dissolved from the base metal is 59.05 kg. The given time divided by the chloride concentration in the
amount of metal dissolved by acid per unit area is 0.0098 injected acid. For well WHD-X10, there was minimum
lb/ft 2 . Similar to the results obtained with well WHD-X10, this mixing in the leading and trailing edges of the acid slug, Fig.
value is significantly less than the accepted value of 0.05 17. Figure 18 demonstrates a different trend for well WHW-
lb/ft 2 . X14. In WHW-X14, the leading edge of the acid slug
Low initial concentrations of calcium and sodium were appeared after 60 minutes of well flow back. There was a
noted with well WHW-X14, Fig. 14. No major changes were strong mixing between the acid slug and the preflush and, as a
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 8
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
result, the leading edge was dispersed. Two mechanisms can and good mixing induced by the produced gases. All of these
explain this mixing. First before the acid fracture treatment, factors indicated that the efficiency of removing mill scale is
the reservoir rock has a low permeability. Therefore, during much better in the case of perforated wells. A similar trend
acid pumping, the reservoir will not be able to take all of the can be seen with Zn and Pb, Table 8. It is also important to
injected fluids. As a result, some of these fluids will flow note that lifting the spent acid using the reservoir pressure is
back, which induce mixing in the wellbore area. This more cost effective than using HPCT.
mechanism may explain this mixing during placing the acid
slug. The second mechanism occurs during well flow back. Conclusions
By the time the leading edge reaches the wellhead, the
1. Analysis of spent acids indicated that the major
wellbore was full of produced gases, which enhanced mixing
tubular contaminants are mill scale and pipe dope.
between the leading edge of the acid and the preflush. It is
2. Spent acid samples collected from deep sour gas
important to note that the preflush is the last fluid to reach the
wells contained up to nearly 105,500 mg/L of total
wellhead. This preflush has low chloride content and would
iron.
definitely reduce the chloride concentration once it was mixed
3. The concentration of zinc in spent acid was used to
with the acid slug.
assess the efficiency of removing pipe dope.
The differences in the path of the acid slug during
4. The concentrations of acid and iron were used to
pickling perforated and unperforated wells will definitely
determine acid reaction with the corrosion products
impact the amount of mill scale, heavy metal dissolved in the
present in the tubing.
acid, and the corrosion rate of the well tubulars (low-carbon
5. The concentration of the chloride ions was used to
steel).
determine the dispersion and mixing behavior of the
Based on the total amount of Mn calculated for
acid slug in the wellbore.
unperforated and perforated wells, the average corrosion rate
This work presents the results obtained from analyzing
of well WHD-X10 was 0.003 lb/ft 2 . The corrosion rate for
more than 2000 samples obtained from twenty treatments. The
well WHW-X14 was 0.036 lb/ft 2 . The average corrosion rate
results of this work have been used to enhance the efficiency
for the perforated well is an order of magnitude higher than
of the pickle treatments and to significantly reduce the
that of unperforated wells. This difference in corrosion rate is
treatment cost. This is extremely important in deep sour gas
significant and can be explained as follows: the acid contacted
wells.
the tubing surface two times in the case of perforated wells.
Secondly, the wellbore has acidic gases (CO2 and H2 S) during
Nomenclature
lifting the spent acid in perforated wells. Thirdly, there is a
aj activity coefficient of a species j -
large peak of iron chloride (a corrosive material) that follows
Cb Bulk Concentration of H+ mole/m3
the acid slug in the case of perforated wells, Fig. 16. It is very
D Inner diameter of CT or tubing m
important to note that the average corrosion rate for both wells
D1 Inner diameter of Tubing m
is within the industry-accepted value of 0.05 lb/ft 2 . The
D2 Outer diameter of Coiled Tubing m
corrosion rate noted with the perforated well can be further
DH Hydraulic diameter m
reduced, if needed, by increasing the loading of the inhibitor
Dm Diffusion Coefficient of H+ m2 /s
used with the acid, increasing the concentration of hydrogen
J Local Mass Transfer Rate mole/m2 .s
sulfide scavenger, and/or adding a corrosion inhibitor in the
k Reaction Rate Coefficient -
preflush. The preflush is the last fluid to reach the wellhead,
Kf Friction Coefficient -
and as shown in Fig. 16, it contained large amounts of iron.
Q Pickle Acid Pump Rate m3 /s
A second point of comparison is the amount of iron present
R Tubing Inner Radius m
in the flow back samples. The amount of iron noted with well
t Time s
WHD-X10 was 56.6 kg, whereas that noted with well WHW-
x Length of Contact m
X14 was 741.2 kg, Table 8. It is important to note that a total
Re Reynolds Number -
of 5,000 gals of 20 wt% HCl was used in well WHD-X10,
Pr Prandtl Number -
whereas well WHW -X14 was treated with 4,000 gals of the
Ub Bulk Velocity m/s
same acid. The acid volume per unit area used in the two wells
was 0.31 and 0.27 gal/ft 2 , respectively. The difference in the
Greek Symbols
amount of iron dissolved is due to factors other than the
αc Fractional Conversion -
volume of acid used. If the amount of iron present in live
acid, and the amount of iron dissolved due to acid reaction of β Reaction Constant -
the based metal were considered, then the amount of iron µ Fluid Viscosity mPa.s
released due to acid reaction with mill scale from the two ? Fluid Density kg/m3
wells (WHD-X10 and WHW-X14) is 35.4 and 498.7 kg,
? Kinematic Viscosity m2 /s
respectively. The higher iron concentration noted with WHW-
X14 is due to the higher acid pumping rate, the longer acid
Acknowledgments
residence time, where the acid contacted the tubing two times,
The authors wish to acknowledge the Saudi Arabian Oil
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 9
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Company (Saudi Aramco) for granting permission to present 13. Taylor, K.C., Nasr-El-Din, H.A. and Al-Alawi, M.:
and publish this paper. Udhailiyah Lab Unit, SALD and the “Systematic Study of Iron Control Chemicals Used
Chemistry Unit and Advanced Instruments Unit of the R&D During Well Stimulation,” SPEJ, 4 (1999) 19-24.
Center, Saudi Aramco were very helpful in their field 14. Walker, M.L., Dill, W.R., Besler, M.R. and McFatridge,
monitoring and analysis of the spent acids, respectively. D.G.: “Iron Control in West Texas Sour-Gas Wells
Members of the stimulation group, R&DC are acknowledged Provides Sustained Production Increases,” JPT (May,
for processing well flow back samples. All engineers in Gas 1991) 603.
Production Engineering Division and local service companies 15. Walker, M.L., Dill, W.R., and Besler, M.R.: “Iron Control
are acknowledged for many useful discussions. Mr. A.A. Al- Provides Increase in Wells Containing Sour Gas,” JCPT
Thawaiqib and Mr. J.A. Hopkins are greatly appreciated for (November 1990) 46.
their support. 16. Kasnick, M.A. and Engen, R.J.: “Iron Sulfide Scaling and
Associated Corrosion in Saudi Arabian Khuff Gas Wells,”
References paper SPE 17933 presented at the 1989 SPE Middle East
1. Maly, G.P.: “Close Attention to the Smallest Job Details Oil Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Manama,
Vital for Minimizing Formation damage,” paper SPE 5702 Bahrain, 11-14 March.
presented at the 1976 SPE Symposium on Formation 17. Ford, W.G.F., Walker, M.L., Halterman, M.P., Parker,
Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, 29-30 January. D.L., Brawley, D.G., and Fulton, R.G.: “Removing a
2. Holub, R.W., Maly, G.P., Noel, R.P., Weinbrandt, R.M.: Typical Iron Sulfide Scale: The Scientific Approach,”
“Scanning Electron Microscope Pictures of Reservoir Rocks paper SPE 24327 presented at the 1992 SPE Rocky
Reveal Ways to Increase Oil Production,” paper SPE 4787 Mountain Regional Meeting held in Casper, WY, 18-21
presented at 1974 SPE Symposium on Formation Damage May.
held in New Orleans, LA, 7-8 February. 18. Brezinski, M.M.: “Chelating Agents in Sour Well
3. McLeod, H.O., Jr., Ledlow, L.B., and Till, M.V.: “The Acidizing: Methodology or Mythology,” paper SPE
Planning, Execution and Evaluation of Acid Treatments in 54721 presented at the 1999 SPE European Formation
Sandstone Formations,” paper SPE 11931 presented at the Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, May
1983 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in 31 – June 1.
San Francisco, CA, 5-8 October. 19. Ashford, D.I.: “Effective Acid Pickling Increase
4. McLeod, H.O., Jr.: “Matrix Acidizing,” JPT (Dec. 1984) Production,” paper CIM # 13 presented at the 1987
2055. Technical Meeting of the South Sas katchewan held in
5. Ertas, A., Cuvalci, O., and Carper, H.J., Jr.: “Determination Regina, SK, Canada, 6-8 October.
of Friction Characteristics of J-55 OCTG Connections 20. Smolarchuk, P., and Dill, W.: “Iron Control in Fracturing
Lubricated with Environmentally Safe Thread Compounds,” and Acidizing Operations,” paper CIM 86-37-28
Tribology Transactions, 42 (1999) 881-887. presented at the 1986 Annual Meeting of CIM held in
6. Prengaman, R.D.: “How Do they Work?” JPT (October Calgary, AB, Canada, 8-11 June.
1981) 93-106. 21. Gougler, P.D., Jr., Hendrick, J.E. and Coulter, A.W.:
7. Smith, B.: “Proper Treatment of Tubulars Key to Iron “Field Investigation Identifies Source and Magnitude of
Control,” Southwestern Petroleum Short Course, 1990. Iron Problems,” paper SPE 13812 presented at the 1985
8. Loewen, K., Chan, K.S., Fraser, M., and Leuty, B.: “A SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City,
Well Stimulation Acid Tube Clean Methodology,” paper OK, 10-12 March.
CIM/SPE 90-47 presented at the 1990 International 22. Rahim, Z. and Al-Qahtani, M.: “Selecting Perforation
Technical Meeting of the CIM and SPE held in Calgary, Intervals and Stimulation Technique in the Khuff Reservoir
AB, Canada, 10 - 13 June. for Improved and Economic Gas Recovery,” paper SPE
9. Coulter, A.W., Jr. and Gougler, P.D.: “Field Tests 68216 presented at the 2001 SPE Middle East Oil
Indicate Tubing is Main Source of Iron Precipitation in Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Manama,
the Wellbore,” OGJ (Sept. 3, 1984) 87. Bahrain, 17-20 March.
10. Hall, B.E. and Dill, W.R.: “Iron Control Additives for 23. Solares, J.R.: “Efficient Technology Application to
Limestone and Sandstone Acidizing of Sweet and Sour Optimize Deep Gas Well Completions in the Khuff and
Wells,” paper SPE 17157 presented at the 1988 SPE Jauf Formations Requiring Hydraulic Fracturing in Saudi
Formation Damage Control Symposium held in Arabia,” paper SPE 68206 presented at the 2001 SPE
Bakersfield, CA, 8-9 February. Middle East Oil Technical Conference and Exhibition
11. Smith, C.F., Crowe, C.W. and Nolan, T.J., III: held in Manama, Bahrain, 17-20 March.
“Secondary Deposition of Iron Compounds Following 24. Lynn, J.D. and Nasr-El-Din, H.A.: "Formation Damage
Acidizing Treatments,” JPT (Sept., 1969) 1121. Associated with Water-Based Drilling Fluids and
12. Crowe, C.W.: “Evaluation of Agents for Preventing Emulsified Acid Study,” paper SPE 54718 presented at
Precipitation of Ferric Hydroxide from Spent Treating the European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague,
Acid,” JPT (April 1985) 691. The Netherlands, May 31-June 1, 1999. Also appeared in
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 10
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
JPT (November 1999) 28-29.
25. Temeng, K.O., Al-Sadeg, M.J., and Al-Mulhim, W.A.: Table 1: Elemental composition of high pressure coiled
“Compositional Grading in the Ghawar Khuff tubing, L-80 and C-95.a
Reservoirs,” paper SPE 49270 presented at the 1998
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New Variable CT L-80 C-95
Orleans, LA, 27-30 September.
26. Taylor, K.C., Nasr-El-Din, H.A. and Al-Alawi, M.: “Field Carbon 0.10-0.14 0.43 max 0.45 max
Test Measures Amount and Type of Iron in Spent Acids,”
paper SPE 50780 presented at the 1999 SPE Oilfield
Chemistry, Houston, TX, 16-19 February. Manganese 0.70-0.90 1.90 max 1.90 max
27. Frenier, W.W. and Growcock, F.B.: “Mechanism of Iron
Oxide Dissolution – A Review of Recent Literature,” Molybdenum 0.21 max - -
Corrosion, 40 (1984) 663.
28. Tanaka, N., Tamamushi, R.: “Kinetic Parameters of Chromium 0.50-0.70 - -
Electrode Reactions,” Electrochimica Act., 9 (1964) 963.
29. Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Al-Humaidan, A., Mohamed, S.K., Nickel 0.20 max 0.25 max -
and Salman, A.: “Iron Sulfide Scale Formation in Water
Supply Wells with Gas Lift,” paper SPE 65017 presented Copper 0.25 max 0.35 max -
at the 2001 SPE Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, TX, 13-16
February.
Phosphorous 0.025 max 0.030 max 0.030 max
30. Lawson, M.B., Martin, L.D. and Arnold, G.D.: “Chemical
Cleaning of FeS Scales,” paper NACE # 219,
Corrosion/80 held in Houston, TX, March. Sulfur 0.005 max 0.030 max 0.030 max
31. Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Al-Humaidan, A., Fadel, B.A., and
Saleh, R.: “Effect of Acid Additives on the Efficiency of Silicon 0.30-0.50 0.45 max 0.45 max
Dissolving Iron Sulfide Scale,” paper NACE # 439
presented at the NACExpo X20, Orlando, FL, March 26-
a. All concentrations are expressed in weight percent. The
31.
balance is iron.
32. Nasr-El-Din, H.A., Al-Humaidan, A., Fadel, B., Frenier,
W.W., and Hill, D.G.: “Investigation of Sulfide
Scavengers in Well Acidizing Fluids”, paper SPE 58712
Table 2: Characteristics of pipe dope.
presented at the X20 SPE International Symposium on
Formation Damage Control held in Lafayette, LA, 23-24
February.
33. Al-Humaidan, A.Y. and Nasr-El-Din, H.A.: Variable Tubing & Drill Pipe
"Optimization of Hydrogen Sulfide Scavengers Used Casing
During Well Stimulation," paper SPE 50765 presented at
the 1999 SPE Oilfield Chemistry held in Houston, TX, Color Brown Gray
16-19 February.
34. Watkins, D.R. and Roberts, G.E.: “On-site Acidizing Fluid
Organic materiala 26.4 wt%b 39.4 wt%b
Analysis Shows HCl and HF Contents Often Varied
Substantially from Specified Amounts,” JPT (May 1983)
865. Inorganic material 73.6 wt% 60.6 wt%
35. Levich, G.V.: “Physicochemical Hydrodynamics,”
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1962, 112-116 and Average Densityc 4.44 g/cm3 4.23 g/cm3
154-157.
Acid Solubilityd 25 wt% 75 wt%

a. Solubility in xylene
b. Average of three measurements
c. Density of inorganic material
d. Solubility of the inorganic portion in 20 wt% HCl
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 11
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 3: Concentrations of various elements in the

inorganic portion of pipe dope samples.a

Tubing &
Variable Drill Pipe
Casing

Zn 17.67 48.20

Pb 24.14 0.37

Si 7.95 8.41

Ca 8.58 3.57

Cu 6.39 Trace

Mg 5.43 8.44

Al 1.59 1.06

W - 0.85

S 0.24 0.12

Fe Trace 0.11

P 0.04 0.04

K 0.50 0.08

Mo 0.05 0.07

Ti 0.06 Trace

Ni, Mn Trace Trace

Na, Cl Trace -

a. Analysis was conducted using XRF technique and

reported as wt%.
SPE 73706 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. AL-MUTAIRI, S.M. AL-DRIWEESH 12
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 4: Analysis of the supernatant after acid reaction

with the inorganic portion of pipe dope.

Fresh
Spent Acid
Aci d
Variable
Casing and
Both Drill Pipe
Tubing
HCl (wt%) 19.4 15.3 9.2
Zn (mg/L) 2 14,624 71,774
Pb (mg/L) 0 2,839 181

Ca (mg/L) 18 1,296 2,424

Cu (mg/L) 0 431 18

Fe (mg/L) 4 152 114

Mg (mg/L) 1 151 186

Al (mg/L) 0 41 35
Na (mg /L) 0 19 28

Mn (mg/L) 0 2 2
Si (mg/L) 0 0 13
a 3
Density (g/cm ) 1.0945 1.1011 1.1572

a. Measured at room temperature.

Table 5: Pickling sequence for perforated and unperforated wells.

WHD -X04 WHD -X28 WSH-X13 WHD -X10

Variable
perforated perforated unperforated unperforated

Gelled water spacer, bbls 10 10 5 5

Surfactant solution, bbls 41 41 32 41

Gelled water spacer, bbls - - - 5

Organic solvent, bbls 4 5.5 5 12

Gelled water spacer, bbls 10 10 5 5

20 wt% HCl, gals 1,300 2,000 2,700 5,000

Gelled water spacer, bbls 10 10 5 5

Field mixing water, bbls 128 - 350 350

SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 13
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 6 : Acid formula for unperforated wells.

Variable WHD -X10 WHW-X14

Concentration Well status during pickling Unperforated Perforated

Gal /1000 gals
Variable
Tubing surface area, ft 2 10,519 13,445
C-1 C-2 C-3
Liner surface area, ft 2 5,486 1,301
Corrosion inhibitor 20 20 20
CT External surface area, ft 2 5,369 -
Corrosion inhib itor aid 20 25 20
Acid concentration, wt% 23.1 21.3
Surfactant 2 2 3
Acid volume, ft 3 668 535
Friction reducer 2 2 2
Pumping rate, ft 3 /min 7.41 12.13
Field mixing water 343 338 342
Max Fe++, mg/L 3,175 -
31 wt% raw HCl acid 613 613 613
Max Fe+++, mg/L 23,624 -
a. C-1, C-2, and C-3 are three local service companies.
Max Fe+++/Fe++ 7.4 -
Table 7: Analysis of field mixing water & pickling acid.
Max Fe (total), mg/L 26,799 105,488
Variable Field Mixing Pickling
Watera Acidb Amount of iron, Kg 56.6 1,027

Max Zn, mg/L 194 301

HCl (wt%) - 21.8

Ca (mg/L) 119 52 Amount of zinc, g 284 1,178

Cl (mg/L) 300-600c 215,298 Max Mn, mg/L 266 525

pH 7.8 0
Amount of manganese, g 143.44 6,584
K (mg/L) - 12
Max Pb, mg/L 104 45
Si (mg/L) 11 0
Amount of lead, g 256 273
Na (mg/L) 206 97
Max HCl in flowback, wt% 19.6 21.3
Sr (mg/L) 2 0

Sulfate (mg/L) 258 184

a. Iron (II) as measured in the field = 0.08 mg/L

b. Total iron of the acid as measured in the field = 77 mg/L.
c. Depends on the location of the water supply well

Table 8: Tubing pickle data.

 Table 9: XRD of the solids separated from well flow back samples, WHD-X10.

Time (min)
Parameter
89 90 91 111 113 123 125

Sample No. 11 12 13 23 25 28 29
pH 7.9 8 8.1 4.65 3.94 3.6 3.4

Barite-BaSO4 , wt% 35 34 37 35 48 75 77
Calcite-CaCO3 , wt% 25 27 25 8 - - -

Dolomite-CaMg(CO3 )2 , wt% 23 23 22 15 - - -

Quartz-SiO2, wt% 9 9 9 12 10 14 11

Magnetite-Fe3 O4 , wt% 8 7 7 30 - 11 12
Hematite-Fe2 O3 , wt% - - - - 35 - -
Geothite-FeOOH, wt% - - - - 7 - -

Table 10: XRF of the solids separated from well flow back samples, WHD-X10.

Time (min)
Parameter
89 90 91 111 113 123 125 141
Sample # 11 12 13 23 25 28 29 35
PH 7.9 8 8.1 4.65 3.94 3.6 3.4 0.05
Ba 20.0 19.6 21.2 19.4 21.5 41.2 41.8 14.9
Ca 14.32 15.00 14.32 6.2 0.4 1.12 1.62 0.2
Fe 5.30 4.66 4.72 19.9 22.0 7.43 8.25 3.6
Si 4.23 3.88 3.96 5.0 3.6 5.83 4.93 11.9
S 4.19 3.78 3.96 4.0 5.9 7.92 7.95 9.7
Mg 2.89 2.87 2.80 1.9 0.4 0.94 0.90 0.1
Zn 1.00 0.92 0.97 0.9 0.2 0.27 0.30 0.2
Al 0.78 0.67 0.74 0.4 0.4 1.12 0.88 0.4
Pb 0.24 0.20 0.20 1.3 1.0 0.99 2.27 0.5
K 0.21 0.20 0.15 760ppm 720ppm 0.15 0.14 <500ppm
Sr 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.1 0.2 0.23 0.30 0.1
Cl 820ppm 680ppm <500ppm 3.6 1.2 0.61 0.44 6.5
Cu 640ppm <500ppm 520ppm 0.2 0.2 0.38 0.51 1.7
Cr 520ppm <500ppm <500ppm 0.2 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.7

Mo <500ppm <500ppm <500ppm 0.3 0.2 0.24 0.18 1.0

a. All concentrations are expressed in wt%, except otherwise mentioned.

SPE 73706 Lessons Learned from Acid Pickle Treatments of Deep/Sour Gas Wells 15
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 11: Acid formula for perforated wells

Concentration

Variable Gal /1000 gals

C-1 a C-2 C-3

Corrosion inhibitor 8 20 20

Corrosion inhibitor aid 20 30 20

Low surface tension 2 2 2

surfactant

H2 S scavenger 10 - 10

Scavenger aid 1 - -

Friction reducer 0 2 -

Field mixing water 345 355 333

31 wt% Raw HCl acid 614 591 613

a. C-1, C-2, and C-3 are three local service companies.

16 H.A. NASR- EL-DIN, S.H. Al-MUTAIRI, S.M. Al-DRIWEESH SPE 73706

Photo 1. Casing & Tubing Dope Photo 2. Drill Pipe Dope

Figure 1. Typical Completion for Gas Wells in the Khuff Reservoirs

36", 236#, X-60
30", 234#, X-42

24", 176#, X-42

Nipple
ID = 5.875"
18-5/8", 115#, K-55

7", 32#, C95, NVAM - TUBING

13-3/8", 72#, NKC & C95VT

Btm of 7" tbg / top of 4 1/2" tbg

7" liner hanger

4 1/2", 13.5 #, C95, NVAM - TUBING
7", 35#, L-80, NVAM - LINER # 2

7" TIW tie back assy.

7" TIW Hydro-Hanger

7", 35#, L-80, NVAM - LINER # 1

PBR Assy.

9-5/8", 53.5#, C-95VTS, NVAM

===
=== Khuff "B"
===

===
=== Khuff "C"
===
7", 35#, L-80, NVAM

TD
 SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 17

Figure 2. Chloride Concentration in Flowback Samples of Figure 4. Iron Concentration in Flowback Samples of WHD-
WHD-X10 (Unperforated Well) X10 (Unperforated Well)

250000 30000
Chloride Concentration, mg/L

Initial Acid Concentration = 23.1 wt%

25000

Iron Concentration, mg/L

200000
Fe(total)
20000
150000 Fe(II)
15000
100000
Suspension 10000
Fluid
50000
5000

0
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Flowback Time, min
Flowback Time, min

Figure 3. pH & HCl Concentration in Flowback Samples of Figure 5. Zn & Pb Concentrations in Flowback Samples of
WHD-X10 (Unperforated Well) WHD-X10 (Unperforated Well)

25
200
pH & HCl Concentration, wt%

Initial Acid Concentration = 23.1 wt%

20
Concentration, mg/L

160 Pb
15 HCl
Zn
120
pH
10
80

5
40

0
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Flowback Time, min 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Flowback Time, min
18 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. Al-Mutairi, S.M. Al-Dirweesh SPE 73706

Figure 6. Iron & Manganese Concentrations in Flowback Figure 8. Chloride Concentration in Flowback Samples
Samples of WHD-X10 (Unperforated Well) of WHW-X14 (Perforated Well)

30000 300 250000

Chloride Concentration, mg/L

Initial Acid Concentration = 21.3 wt%

Mn Concentration, mg/L
Fe Concentration, mg/L

25000 250
Fe ( Total) 200000

20000 Mn 200
150000
15000 150
100000
10000 100

5000 50 50000

0 0 0
0 100 200 300 0 50 100 150
Flowback Time, min Flowback Time, min

Figure 7. Ca & Na Concentrations in Flowback Samples of Figure 9. pH & HCl Concentration in Flowback Samples of
WHD -X10 (Unperforated Well) WHW -X14 (Perforated Well)

100000 25
Initial Acid Concentration = 21.3 wt%
Ca & Na Concentrations, mg/L

Suspension Fluid
pH & HCl Concentration, wt%

Ca
20
10000 Na
HCl
Initial Acid Concentration = 23.1 wt% 15
1000
10

100
5 pH

10 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150
Flow-Back Time, min Flowback Time, min
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 19

Figure 10. Iron Concentration in Flowback Samples Figure 12. Zn & Pb Concentrations in Flowback Samples of
of WHW-X14 (Perforated Well) WHW -X14 (Perforated Well)

120000 350

300
Total Iron Concentration, mg/L

Concentration, mg/L
Pb
250
80000 Zn
200

150
40000
100

50

0 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
Flowback Time, min Flowback Time, min

Figure 11. Iron Concentrations in Flowback Samples of Figure 13. Iron & Manganese Concentrations in Flowback
WUT-X20 (Perforated Well) Samples of WHW-X14 (Perforated Well)

80000 1000000
Mn
Iron Concentration, mg/L

100000 Fe(total)
Concentration, mg/L

60000 Fe(total)
Fe(II) 10000

40000 1000

100
20000
10

0
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 50 100 150
Flowback Time, min Flowback Time, min
20 H.A. NASR-EL-DIN, S.H. Al-Mutairi, S.M. Al-Dirweesh SPE 73706

Figure 14. Ca & Na Concentrations in Flowback Samples of Figure 16. Fe & HCl Concentrations in Flowback Samples
WHW-X14 (Perforated Well) of WHW-X14 (Perforated Well)

1200 120000 24

Fe (Total)

HCl Concentration, wt%

Fe Concentration, mg/L
100000 20
Concentration, mg/L

Ca HCl
800 80000 16
Na

60000 12

400 40000 8

20000 4

0 0 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
Flowback Time, min Flowback Time, min

Figure 15. Fe & HCl Concentrations in Flowback Samples of Figure 17. Normalized Concentration of Cl- in Flowback
WHD -X10 (Unperforated Well) Samples of WHD-X10 (Unperforated Well)

30000 24 1.2
Co (Initial Cl- Concentration) = 187,699 mg/L
HCl Concentration, wt%
Fe Concentration, mg/L

25000 20 1
Fe(total)
20000 16 0.8
HCl
C/Co

15000 12 0.6

10000 8 0.4

5000 4 0.2

0 0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Flowback Time, min Flowback Time, min
SPE 73706 LESSONS LEARNED FROM ACID PICKLE TREATMENTS OF DEEP/SOUR GAS WELLS 21

Figure 18. Normalized Concentration of Cl- in Flowback

Samples of WHW-X14 (Perforated Well)

1.2
Co (Initial Cl- Concentration) = 215,473 mg/L
1

0.8
C/Co

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 50 100 150
Flowback Time, min