Obtaining Successful Squeeze-Cementing Results
Authors: Rike J.L. 
Published: December 2007

This paper was prepared for the 48th Annual Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, to be held in Las Vegas, Nev., Sept. 30-Oct. 3, 1973. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Publication elsewhere after publication in the JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or the SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL is usually granted upon request to the Editor of the appropriate journal provided agreement to give proper credit is made.

Discussion of this paper is invited. Three copies of any discussion should be sent to the Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such discussion may be presented at the above meeting and, with the paper, may be considered for publication in one of the two SPE magazines.

Squeeze cementing is one of those routine well operations that has acquired a multitude of rules of thumb or procedural gimmicks as a result of evolution as a nontechnical field practice. The real technology controlling practice. The real technology controlling squeeze-cementing behavior is readily available, but practices in use are often contrary to both the technology published and engineering logic. Maximum pressures and displaced volumes are meticulously reported, even though their effect on results is unimportant. Formation breakdown is often accomplished at a high rate, causing larger fractures and more cement needed. Assumptions are made on the basis of whole cement entering the matrix and the concept of a horizontal pancake of cement, when both ideas are invalid.

Both high and low pressure squeeze-cementing techniques have their proper application. Fluid-loss control is important in set-through applications, but fluid loss must not be too low. Reduction of slurry density is often important in these applications. Pumpability time for any cement must be determined with proper regard for the mix water anticipated and the synergistic effect of some additives. The time must be sufficient to complete the job, but not so long that a firm set is jeopardized. Strength of set cement used in squeeze operations can be quite low and still retain all the pressure differential that most pipe can withstand. pipe can withstand. Batch mixing is highly preferable to hopper mixing. Successful evaluation is not conclusive with the conventional pressure test, and a reverse differential is important to obtain a definitive test and provide for optimum reperforating conditions. Improving results will probably require considerable training to probably require considerable training to re-orient personnel from many of the erroneous concepts prevalent.

Introduction

Squeeze-cementing technology, which is straightforward and currently well documented in the responsible literature, has been clouded by field practices that were developed over the past half century when the technique was past half century when the technique was considered an art rather than a science. Cement quality control left a great deal to be desired in the earlier usages, and little concern was given to the source of the mix water. Many currently popular practices were developed by trial and error on the part of field personnel to meet the irregularities caused by the cement, additives and mix water variations.

The problem is further compounded by the jet-hopper mixing system.